Understanding the Biophilia Hypothesis through a Comparative Analysis of Residential

Typologies in Phoenix, São Paulo, and Tokyo

by

Pinar Orman

A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Interior Architecture

Approved July 2017 by the

Graduate Supervisory Committee:

Jose Bernardi, Chair

Elizabeth Harmon-Vaughan
Kestutis Paul Zygas
William Heywood

ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY

August 2017
©2017 Pinar Orman

All Rights Reserved

 ABSTRACT

Recent studies indicate that there is a positive influence of nature and nature

integrated built environments on human health and wellness in various physical,

physiological and social domains. This thesis critically reviews formally and contextually

three distinct residential typologies designed by renowned architects Frank Lloyd Wright

(1867-1959), Lina Bo Bardi (1914-1992), and Ryue Nishizawa (1966-), in different

periods and countries; the United States of America (USA), Brazil and Japan. Yet, the

buildings analyzed in the research are relatively connected by means of nature and the

natural elements in their constructed essence. This research focuses on the features of the

buildings that characterize the Biophilic Design, along with theoretical and practical ideas

of the architects behind each building in their own process of formation.

The Biophilic Design Framework has been developed out of the Biophilia

Hypothesis (Fromm, 1973; Wilson, 1984) which puts forward an explanatory suggestion

that human affinity and affiliation with nature are based on genetic and environmental

adaptation processes. This research is designed to display how specific natural

phenomena apply to the built environment within the Framework of Biophilic Design

(Kellert, & Calabrese, 2015) and how the Biophilia Hypothesis translates into the built

environment. To accomplish this, two primary and three secondary research questions

were developed for the study. The research will provide an understanding of the Biophilia

Hypothesis and its impact on the built environment through the evaluation of research

variables on the case studies using the ‘twenty-four attributes’ indicated in the ‘three

experiences’ of Biophilic Design.

i
 These architects’ approaches and the methods applied theoretically and practically

to these research sites were unveiled and analyzed through three case studies. A positive

correlation regarding the success of the case studies and their Biophilic characteristics is

found by analyzing the research sites and critiques from the authorities in written

literature. The applicability of the ‘Biophilic Design Framework’ was found and

evidenced by the findings from these case studies designed by master architects and

located in different climates, regions and contexts.

ii
 DEDICATION

To the Earth and Human Nature;

the only ‘true’ way to step forward to the next level of future architecture.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Achievement for completing this research I am greatly thankful for the patience,

wisdom and direction of Jose Bernardi, my committee chair, and to Kestutis Paul Zygas,

PhD, Elizabeth Harmon-Vaughan, PhD, William Heywood, PhD, Thomas Hartman for

guiding and opening new doors of knowledge to me provided through their courses in

architecture theory, history, practice, and psychology, and to Elizabeth F. Calabrese,

AIA, for the readings and discussions on human and ecological health and wellbeing.

I am grateful to my country Turkish Republic. I feel privileged being sent to the

United States of America by the law and regulations of the Turkish Republic in order to

pursue a graduate level education as a scholar. It is my ethical responsibility to help bring

Turkey to a state of the art developments; it is my dedication to humanity and the

progress of mankind, not only at home but in the world.

I wish to acknowledge the unwavering love and support of family and friends

throughout this journey of life. I am grateful for this generous love and support that

helped me to overcome the challenges of the process.

Kadir Orman, Oznur Orman, Oyku Orman

Zenner family

and Robert Paul Zenner

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... viii

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... ix

NOMENCLATURE ........................................................................................................ xiii

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1

Overview / Research Profile ............................................................................. 1

Brief History of Case Studies ........................................................................... 2

Taliesin West, Phoenix, U.S.A. (1937-1959) ............................................. 2

Glass House, São Paulo, Brazil (1950-1951).............................................. 2

Garden & House, Tokyo, Japan (2006-2011) ............................................. 3

Brief Introduction of the Research Variables ................................................... 3

Variable 1 .................................................................................................... 3

Variable 2 .................................................................................................... 3

Variable 3 .................................................................................................... 4

The Purpose of Research .................................................................................. 4

Conceptional Framework .................................................................................. 4

Contribution of This Study .............................................................................. 5

Approach ........................................................................................................... 5

v
CHAPTER Page

2 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................ 6

Methods............................................................................................................. 7

Selection Criteria ........................................................................................ 8

Study Findings in the Literature ....................................................................... 9

Theoretical Background: The Biophilia Hypothesis and Biophilic Design...... 9

The Application of Biophilic Design – Biophilic Design Framework

(Kellert & Calabrese, 2015, p. 9) .............................................................. 17

Benefits of Biophilia and Biophilic Design .................................................... 18

Summary and Critique .................................................................................... 23

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY........................................................................... 25

Research Questions ......................................................................................... 25

Methods........................................................................................................... 25

Research Methodology ............................................................................. 25

Case Study Structure / Settings ................................................................. 26

Context: Research Sites and Case Studies ................................................ 26

Criteria for Site Selection.......................................................................... 27

Variables ................................................................................................... 28

Research Diagram ..................................................................................... 28

Data Collection and Limitations ............................................................... 28

Ethnographic Observations ....................................................................... 29

Content Analyzes ...................................................................................... 29

vi
CHAPTER Page

4 DATA ANALYZES, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ..................................... 30

Taliesin West, Phoenix, U.S.A. (1937-1959) ................................................. 30

Glass House, São Paulo, Brazil (1950-1951).................................................. 50

Garden & House, Tokyo, Japan (2006-2011) ................................................. 91

Discussions Correlation ................................................................................ 114

5 CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................. 115

Conclusions and Discussions ........................................................................ 115

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 183

APPENDIX

PLANS, SECTIONS AND MODELS OF CASE STUDIES

A TALIESIN WEST, PHOENIX, U.S.A. (1937-1959) ......................................... 197

B GLASS HOUSE, SÃO PAULO, BRAZIL (1950-1951) .................................... 203

C GARDEN & HOUSE, TOKYO, JAPAN (2006-2011) ...................................... 210

vii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

2.1. Principles of Biophilic Design. ................................................................................ 120

2.2. The Framework: Experiences and Attributes of Biophilic Design .......................... 121

3.1. Case Study Structure Compares the Project Sites and Research Variables ............. 122

viii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1.1. Conceptual Framework of the Study ....................................................................... 123

2.1. Physiological Stress Recovery Rates (Changes in Pulse Transit Time (PTT))

Measured in Natural and Urban Environments ...............................................................124

3.1. The Site Context, Taliesin West ...............................................................................125

3.2. The Site Context, Glass House ................................................................................ 126

3.3. The Glass House in 1951 ......................................................................................... 127

3.4. The Site Context, Garden & House ......................................................................... 128

4.1.a. Entrance of Taliesin West; Taliesin Fellowship Logo — Whirling Arrow .......... 129

4.1.b. Ancient Hohokam Petroglyph Found on Taliesin West Site Context .................. 130

4.2. A View from The Prow Garden ............................................................................... 131

4.3. Conceptual Metaphor of Wright: Desert ‘Sea’ .........................................................132

4.4. Taliesin West Echoes the Naturalistic Shapes and Forms in the Evoking Nature of

Desert Environment .........................................................................................................133

4.5. Mysterious Mobility and Wayfinding in Taliesin West ............................................134

4.6. A Direct Experience of Nature at Immediate and Distant ........................................135

4.7. The Main Axis of the Taliesin West .........................................................................136

4.8. Repeating Crossbeams above the Main Axis............................................................137

4.9. The Indirect Experience of Nature Is Also Sustained through Natural Materials in

Taliesin West ...................................................................................................................138

4.10. The Desert Masonry Discovered in the Lab, Taliesin West ...................................139

4.11. The Walls Indented with Stretched Thin Lines As They Exist on Canyon Walls ..140

ix
Figure Page

4.12. “In All This Astounding Desert There Is Not One Hard Undotted Line to Be Seen”

(Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993) ............................................141

4.13. The Natural Light Assists the Work Environments in Taliesin West: Wright’s

Office ...............................................................................................................................142

4.14. The Garden Room; Access of Natural Light Is A Prominent ‘Attribute’ for the

Direct Experience of Nature ............................................................................................143

4.15. Taliesin West Is “A View Over the Rim of the World.” (Wright, Lucas, & Frank

Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 13) ...........................................................................144

4.16.a. Wright’s Living Quarter’s Operable Doors Apply the Biophilic Experience of

Space and Place by the Direct Experience of Nature on the Site ...................................145

4.16.b. Wright’s Living Quarter’s Glass Doors ...............................................................146

4.16.c. Top Lights at the Wright’s Private Living Room ................................................147

4.16.d. Top Lights at the Garden Room...........................................................................148

4.17. Wright’s Office; the Architect Opens the Corner of Room ....................................149

4.18. The Drafting Studio Is in Touch with the Natural Surroundings............................150

4.19. The Dining Room and Breezeway adjacent to the Drafting Studio........................151

4.20. Refuge Space at the Garden Room..........................................................................152

4.21. Prospect ‘Attribute’ in the Garden Room ...............................................................153

4.22. The Garden Room; Fire as a Social and Natural Element......................................154

4.23. A Prospect View towards the Garden and Wright's Private Living Quarter ..........155

4.24. Kiva Theater Exposes Natural Beauty and ‘Experiences’ ......................................156

4.25. The volume of the Cabaret Theater Was Developed in A Hexagonal Form ..........157

x
Figure Page

4.26. Fireplace at the Cabaret ..........................................................................................158

4.27. The Music Pavilion at Taliesin West ......................................................................159

4.28. The Music Pavilion's Concrete Seating Rows Rise on the Natural Incline of

Topography .....................................................................................................................160

4.29. Glass House Is a ‘Harmonious Fusion’ of Architecture and Nature ......................161

4.30. Glass House Reflects a Synthesis of Modern and Vernacular from the Different

Stylized Front and Back Façades .....................................................................................162

4.31. The Building Entry Opens up to the Lifted Main Floor at Center of the House ....163

4.32. The Glass House Provides Uninterrupted Views towards the Natural

Surroundings ....................................................................................................................164

4.33. Tree and Staircases’ Atmospheric Features Guide the Project Structure and

Orientation While Creating Life in Architecture .............................................................165

4.34. Geometric Form of the House and Natural Irregularity of the Landscape Conjunct

in a Continuous Flow .......................................................................................................166

4.35. The Elevated Atrium of the Glass House Reveals the “Airborne Architecture” as a

Way of Liberating Houses ...............................................................................................167

4.36. The Glass House Has Been ‘Like a Stage for a Display of Natural Phenomena’ ..168

4.37. The Free Plan of the Main Floor Develops around a Tree, Which Is Enclosed by the

Glass Atrium ....................................................................................................................169

4.38. A Plain White Wall at the Right Side of Entrance with Small Disguised Doors

Screens the Privacy of Everyday Life in the Kitchen, Bedrooms and Service Areas .....170

xi
Figure Page

4.39. Garden & House Project Displays 21st Century’s Urban Conditions and Its

Sociocultural Formative Structures..................................................................................171

4.40. The Green Façade of Garden & House Proposes an Open Life Style ....................172

4.41. The Garden & House Project Manifests Its Own Identical Nature Integrated

Identity, and Embraces Being Part of Everyday ..............................................................173

4.42. Nature of Industrial Materials Is an Abstract Way to Foster the Relations with

Nature in the Built Environment ......................................................................................174

4.43. The Unique Architectural Promenade of the House Is Set by a Steel Custom Made

White Painted Spiral Staircase .........................................................................................175

4.44. The Tiny Bedroom on the First Floor of Garden & House ....................................176

4.45. The Outdoor Space Also Used for Business Meetings in Garden & House...........177

4.46. “A Layer of Earth Finishes” the Second Floor with a Concrete Bench and Planters

in Garden & House ..........................................................................................................178

4.47. The Bathroom in the Second Floor of Garden & House ........................................179

4.48.a. The Third Floor Accommodates a Bedroom with a Small Office Space in Garden

& House ...........................................................................................................................180

4.48.b. The Third Floor; a Small Office in the Balcony Enclosed by a Concrete Planter

and Circular Plexiglas Railing .........................................................................................181

4.49. A Central Focal Point – the White Painted Steel Staircase – Links Each Sequential

Layer to the Whole, as a Main Transitional Space in Garden & House ..........................182

xii
 NOMENCLATURE

Biophilia. “The innate tendency to focus on life and lifelike processes” (Wilson, 1984,

p.1).

Biophilic design. “Biophilic design is the deliberate attempt to translate an understanding

of the inherent human affinity to affiliate with natural systems and processes

–known as ‘biophilia’ (Wilson 1984, Kellert and Wilson 1993)– into the design of

the built environment” (Kellert, 2008, p. 3).

xiii
 Chapter 1

Introduction

Overview / Research Profile

The development of this thesis has been inspired by Edward Wilson’s (1984)

Biophilia Hypothesis, and Stephen R. Kellert and Elizabeth F. Calabrese’s (2015)

‘Biophilic Design Framework’, which is structured around three major categories: the

direct experience of nature, the indirect experience of nature, and the experience of space

and place. The focus of this study is to analyze residential case studies of renowned

architects Frank Lloyd Wright, Lina Bo Bardi, Ryue Nishizawa, and uncover their

distinct ways of transferring their approaches into each built environment connected to

nature. An analytical research study was conducted by looking at implications of the

Biophilic Design principles on their work in three culturally, geographically and

contextually different and diverse locations: the Sonoran Desert in Phoenix, the Atlantic

Forest remnants in São Paulo, and the dense commercial urban fabric of downtown

Tokyo.

Architecture of residences and formal typologies in different geographical

locations may diverge depending upon cultural, climatic, contextual factors. This

research looks at the Biophilic ‘experiences and attributes’ of residences typologically

and contextually distinct from each other: ‘Taliesin West’ by Frank Lloyd Wright, the

‘Glass House’ by Lina Bo Bardi, and the ‘Garden & House’ by Ryue Nishizawa.

1
Brief History of Case Studies

Taliesin West, Phoenix, U.S.A. (1937-1959). In the fifth year of The Taliesin

Fellowship, the Wrights and their apprentices search for a more hospitable and healthier

winter climate to live and work (Lind, 1994, p. 46). Wright’s experiments in camping in

the Sonoran desert become a continuous legacy of his ingenious spirit. Having invested in

several hundred acres of land in the foothills of northeast Scottsdale, Wright initiates his

desert utopia consisting of low-slung buildings designed to follow the horizontal

expansiveness of the desert. With the years passing, the facility constantly evolves to

include a drafting studio, three theaters, a workshop, Wright’s office, dining facilities,

private living complexes, and residences for apprentices and staff. Taliesin West has been

Wright’s winter home until his death in 1959. It still houses both the Frank Lloyd Wright

Foundation and School of Architecture, with students pressing ahead with many of the

Fellowship’s traditions (Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation).

Glass House, São Paulo, Brazil (1950-1951). In 1946, Lina Bo Bardi and her art

critic and dealer husband, Pietro Maria Bardi, travel from Italy to Brazil, upon an

invitation of Assis Chateaubriand who wants to build the Museu de Arte de São Paulo

(MSAP; São Paulo Museum of Art). Maria Bardi accepts the job as curator, director, and

main dealer for the museum, and the couple moves to Brazil (Carranza & Lara, 2014, p.

160).

The principles defining Bo Bardi’s architecture can be seen in her first building

the ‘Glass House’ (Carranza & Lara, 2014, p. 160). At the time the Glass House was

designed and built on a 7,000 square-meter plot of land, it was one of the first residences

2
in the Morumbi district (Burns, 2011) and it has become a desirable site for the São Paulo

elite.

Garden & House, Tokyo, Japan (2006-2011). The four story building on a

rectangle of eight by four meters (thirteen feet wide, and twenty-six feet length, size of

the project land) is designed by Nishizawa for two women in the editorial business. The

project is located in a dense commercial district of downtown Tokyo. Desiring to work

and live in this historical urban environment, the clients request a specific program in

between a residence and office (Nishizawa, 2013, p. 16). Design of the project takes three

years, from 2006 to 2009, and construction is completed in 2011.

Brief Introduction of the Research Variables

The research variables of this study are ‘three experiences of nature in an

architectural space’ as stated in the ‘Biophilic Design Framework’ (Kellert, & Calabrese,

2015): the direct experience of nature, the indirect experience of nature, the experience

of space and place. These ‘experiences’ are created by twenty-four elements called the

‘Biophilic Design attributes’.

Variable 1. The ‘attributes’ in the direct experience of nature include natural

light, air, water, plants, animals, weather, natural landscapes and ecosystems, and fire

referring to “actual contact with environmental features in the built environment” (Kellert

& Calabrese, 2015, p. 9).

Variable 2. The ‘attributes’ in the indirect experience of nature include images of

nature, natural materials, natural colors, simulating natural light and air, naturalistic

shapes and forms, evoking nature, information richness, age /change / and the patina of

time, natural geometries, biomimicry referring to “contact with the representation or

3
image of nature, the transformation of nature from its original condition, or exposure to

particular patterns and processes characteristic of the natural world” (Kellert &

Calabrese, 2015, p. 9).

Variable 3. The ‘attributes’ in the experience of space and place include:

prospect and refuge, organized complexity, integration of parts to wholes, transitional

spaces, mobility and wayfinding, cultural and ecological attachment to place referring to

“spatial features characteristic of the natural environment that have advanced human

health and wellbeing” (Kellert & Calabrese, 2015, p. 9).

The Purpose of Research

The primary purpose of this research is to analyze residential projects designed by

Frank Lloyd Wright, Lina Bo Bardi, and Ryue Nishizawa within the ‘Biophilic Design

Framework’ (Kellert, & Calabrese, 2015). Its ‘experiences and attributes’ are the

‘variables’ of this study: the direct experience of nature, the indirect experience of

nature, and the experience of space and place. The other fundamental goal of the study is

to create a unique awareness of the Biophilic Design Concept for habitat curators,

architects and designers.

The research will provide an understanding of the Biophilia Hypothesis and its

impacts on built environment through the evaluation of sites using the ‘twenty-four

attributes’ indicated in the ‘three experience’ variables of the Biophilic Design.

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework for this study is illustrated to display relationships

between the case studies, contexts and the Biophilic Design Concept as shown in Figure

1.1.

4
Contribution of This Study

Analyzing the technical and aesthetical aspects of these masterworks through the

lens of Biophilia, this study might be insightful and persuasive for architects and

designers to apply the Biophilic Design principles on future projects, and spark interest

for research and deeper investigations into the discipline. This research may provide

guidelines for designing habitable and healthier built environments for the health and

well-being of occupants, and the findings may contribute to the existing research on

Biophilic Design and the Biophilia Hypothesis.

Approach

The First Chapter provides an introduction to the research profile, gives a brief

history of the three residential buildings, and also offers an introduction of variables

along with the purpose of research with a conceptual framework. Chapter Two reviews

literature to support and consolidate this research with a theoretical base. Theoretical

approaches to Biophilia and Biophilic Design, and empirical study results are explored in

this chapter to show benefits of the connection between human beings and nature.

Findings from the literature review are discussed at the end of Chapter Two. Chapter

Three describes the research methodology using data collected for the case study

analysis. Chapter Four analyzes data collected from the case study sites. The ‘twenty-four

attributes’ indicated in ‘three experience’ variables of the Biophilic Design Framework

are evaluated in this chapter to inform study findings. Chapter Five offers a conclusion

and develops generalizations based upon the case studies and cited data from the

literature.

5
 Chapter 2

Literature Review

The human to nature connection has been researched and developed across the

world in various interpretations and disciplines for years. All these works have been

fundamentally grounded on an increasing need for a better connection with natural

environments, which leads to physical, mental and societal wellbeing. It is also well

known and scientifically proven that relationships between species are extremely

important to enable sustaining habitable ecosystems in micro and macro scales.

Dependency of species from one to another has brought awareness to the issue of human

destructiveness on ecosystems, an issue that requires urgent attention from researchers,

scientists, stakeholders and governments.

The Biophilia Hypothesis developed by Edward Wilson (1984) brought attention

to ecological relationships when he described it as “the innate tendency to focus on life

and lifelike processes” (p. 1). Nobel Prize awarded scientist Barbara McClintock puts

into words her kinship, affection, and empathy with regard to her microscopic work on

chromosomes stating, “I actually felt as if I was right down there and these were my

friends […] As you look at these things, they become part of you. And you forget

yourself” (as cited in McVay, 1993, p. 14). Her words manifest the essence of Wilson’s

Biophilia Hypothesis which proposes that human beings possess an innate tendency to

life and lifelike processes. While closer relationships with other species rationalize

recognizing and valuing them, it is difficult to find this association in evolving ‘natural’

environments due to the aggressive consumption of natural resources. The Biophilic

6
Design in built environment comes to the scene at this point to regenerate and foster this

disrupted union between humans and nature.

From an architectural and design point of view, it is important to understand

conceptualization of Biophilic Design. It is of vital importance to dismantle destructive

production of concrete blocks which are meant to intentionally or unintentionally flatten

the world in the end. Looking at the master architects’ contribution to nature-integrated

built environments may inspire designers to create better habitats themselves. Thus, this

research aims to highlight the importance of nature in built environments to inspire

production of constructive design methods. According to positive results of research in

literature, construction of affection between live species consolidates physical and mental

wellbeing as well as societal relationships. That being said, the literature based on the

topics: ‘the Biophilia Hypothesis’, ‘Biophilic Design’, ‘Taliesin West’, ‘Glass House’,

‘Garden & House’, and the architects of these buildings are synthesized and critiqued in

this chapter to provide background information for this study.

Methods

The data of this research was provided by the Arizona State University

Architecture and Design Library, its catalogs, indexes, and Google Scholar. In the data

collection process the following terms and key words were used: a) “Biophilia”, “the

Biophilia Hypothesis”, “Biophilic Design”, “built environment”, “nature and built

environment”, “health and environment”, b) “Frank Lloyd Wright”, “Taliesin West”,

“Frank Lloyd Wright and Taliesin West”, “organic architecture”, c) “Lina Bo Bardi”,

“Casa de Vidro”, “Glass House”, “Casa de Vidro Glass House”, “Lina Bo Bardi and Casa

de Vidro”, “Lina Bo Bardi and Glass House”, d) “Ryue Nishizawa”, “Garden and

7
House”, “Ryue Nishizawa and Garden and House”. The literature was searched by

conducting all potential combinations of these terms and key words. Relevant sources

were selected by following study’s selection criteria:

Selection criteria.

1. The study question, purpose or hypothesis addresses at least one of the following

aspects:

a) Biophilia, Biophilic Design, Biophilic Design principles and applications, and

its relationship with built environment.

b) Benefits of human nature interaction.

c) Using nature as an element in architecture.

d) The point of views reflected by master architects Frank Lloyd Wright, Lina

Bo Bardi, and Ryue Nishizawa about nature and built environment.

e) History and information about Taliesin West, Glass House, and Garden &

House.

2. Source of publications: Books, book chapters, studies in peer-reviewed journals,

studies in architecture periodicals and journals, articles in national and international

journals, white papers and websites of reliable foundations.

8
 Study Findings in the Literature

Theoretical Background: The Biophilia Hypothesis and Biophilic Design

This section presents the Biophilia Hypothesis and the Biophilic Design, its

principles, applications, and benefits. It concludes with a discussion on findings. Wilson

and Kellert’s descriptions of the topic, history of the topic, main publications and works,

related fields and disciplines, and research outcomes are indicated in this section.

In the 1970s, “the term Biophilia was used by German-born American

psychoanalyst Erich Fromm (1973) in The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness. Fromm

describes Biophilia as ‘the passionate love of life and of all that is alive’” (as cited in

Rogers, 2016). With the same sense, the word Biophilia is introduced to literature by

American biologist Edward O. Wilson in 1984 (McVay, 1993, p. 11). Wilson (1984)

defines Biophilia as “the innate tendency to focus on life and lifelike processes” (p. 1) in

his book Biophilia which is the cornerstone of the literature, the basis of most research,

and the precursor to the following reliable master sources: The Biophilia Hypothesis

(Kellert & Wilson, 1993), Kinship to Mastery (Kellert, 1997), Building for life: designing

and understanding the human-nature connection (Kellert, 2005; 2012), Biophilic Design

(Kellert, Heerwagen, & Mador, 2008), and the documentary movie Biophilic design: The

architecture of life (Kellert, Finnegan, Miller, & Bullfrog Films, 2011).

In the book Building for life: designing and understanding the human-nature

connection (Kellert 2005; Kellert 2012), the Biophilia Concept is interpreted as:

A complex of weak genetic tendencies to value nature that are instrumental in

human physical, material, emotional, intellectual, and moral well-being. Because

9
 biophilia is rooted in human biology and evolution, it represents an argument for

conserving nature based on long-term self-interest.

Based on the content of this hypothesis, study areas encompass many disciplines

including biology, evolutionary biology and psychology, eco psychology, environmental

psychology, cognitive archeology, physiology, neuroscience and general field of

medicine, urban planning and architecture, design and so on. Human response and

relationship with the environment is the study area of Environmental Psychology. Kopec

(2006) states that the secretion and absorption of neurochemicals is triggered by positive

environmental attributes and qualities, which enhance humans’ psychological and

physical health and wellbeing. Psychological utilitas of nature are generally founded on

theories of restorative influences. The process of recuperating psychological, physical,

and social competency explains the meaning of restoration in this concept (Hartig, 2004).

Forces of evolution within ecosystems cause humans and other species to adapt to their

environment; and Evolutionary Psychology addresses this through a theoretical

perspective as well. This discipline uses the term Environment of Evolutionary

Adaptation (EEA) to symbolize “the qualities of the environment humans are adapted to

live in” (as cited in Grinde & Patil, 2009, p. 2332-2343). Disparity from the form of life

humans are genetically designed for is defined as mismatches (Eaton, Konner & Shostak,

1988). These mismatches carry negative influences, such as “stress”, called discords.

These are notably found in inclined people (Grinde, 2002). Grinde and Patil (2009)

exemplify these discords, such as improper behavior of animals when they are put in

environments at zoological gardens different from their EEA. As it is indicated in the

Hypothesis of Biophilia, a better understanding of human evolution is important for the

10
Biophilic Design and designing of environments which would be the best fit to human

comfort and evolution. It is worth noting that human’s biological adaptation has evolved

in natural environments for 99% of species history (Kellert & Calabrese, 2015).

19th century’s authoritative planner and landscape architect, Frederick Law

Olmsted (1865) mentions that stresses derive from job demands and city’s congestion.

Discussing that, Roger Ulrich (1979) indicates exposure to nature is effectual in

recuperation of associated stresses. Olmsted (1865) argues looking at nature engages,

calms and rejuvenates the mind, while exercising it, and in this way the rejuvenation is

transmitted from mind to body. The legitimations of strong correlation between green

spaces and wellness by medical professionals prompt a boost in the urban park movement

at the end of the same century (Hickman, 2013).

Literature from past decades to today shows a correlation between nearby nature

experiences and reduced stress, improved wellness in most research. To explain such

responses, many articles refer to two established theories, which support the basic

foundation: Nature is a contributing factor to recuperate from life’s pressures (Bratman,

Hamilton, & Daily, 2012). Ulrich et al. (1991) assert the Stress Reduction theory (SRT)

to elucidate psychological and physiological responses to natural spaces. Wolf, Kruger,

and Rozance (2014) expound upon Ulrich’s SRT in this way:

Being in an unthreatening natural environment or viewing natural elements (such

as vegetation or water) activates a positive affective response, an inclination to

approach such natural elements, and sustained, wakefully relaxed attention.

Individuals then can experience a decrease in stress, which involves reduced

11
 levels of negatively toned feelings and reductions in elevated physiological

conditions (such as heart rate and blood pressure).

In another theory, Rachel and Stephan Kaplan (1989; 1995) propound Attention

Restoration theory (ART) focusing on cognitive processes. In their book The Experience

of Nature: A Psychological Perspective, they argue that mental attention can be

decreased after the operations require elongated focus. This causes exhaustion and loss of

concentration. According to their argument, cognitive recuperation requires Fascination,

which is one of the attributes of restorative environments. The “soft fascinations” in

natural environments such as; moving clouds through the sky, bubbling water over rocks

in a river, or whispering leaves in a breeze, enable “effortless attention”. In such cases,

experiencing nature or natural scenes can allow people to concentrate and better focus

their attention (S. Kaplan & R. Kaplan, 1989; S. Kaplan 1995).

In Lidwell’s book Universal Principles of Design (2003), the Biophilia effect is

founded on effectiveness of environments qualified as stress reductive, and focus and

concentration promotive. These environments are rich with nature view(s) and imagery.

To reflect the Biophilia Hypothesis on building environments, and to inform

design of the ‘habitats’, Kellert (2008) introduces the term for architects and designers in

the book Biophilic Design. Editors of this enlightening book Stephen R. Kellert, Judith H.

Heerwagen, Martin L. Mador bring together theorists, scientists, and practitioners from

various disciplines to discuss the Biophilic Design philosophy elaborately and

thoroughly. Kellert (2008) clarifies the definition of ‘Biophilic Design’ in this book:

12
 Biophilic design is the deliberate attempt to translate an understanding of the

inherent human affinity to affiliate with natural systems and processes – known as

– biophilia (Wilson 1984, Kellert and Wilson 1993) – into the design of the built

environment. (p. 3)

In the book The Nature of Human Nature, the founding father of the hypothesis,

Wilson (2008), emphasizes how the connection of Biophilia and Architecture is of vital

importance:

I can think of no more important way to apply the naturalistic approach to human

behavior than in the design of the places in which we live and work. The evidence

is overwhelming that, given a choice, people wish to bring the beauty and

harmony of nature within sight. When possible, they like to blend these qualities

into the details of their daily existence, because in so doing, they add to their own

sense of word and security. If architecture and design are ever to become science

as well as art, it will be through scholarship of the kind exemplified by the

contributions to Biophilic Design. (p. 25)

The Biophilic Design Concept falls into broad branches in the design disciplines,

focusing on macro and micro scale environments as it is in the medical and social

disciplines. The author of the book Biophilic Cities: Integrating Nature into Urban

Design and Planning Timothy Beatley (2011) defines the Biophilic Cities as “cities that

provide close and daily contact with nature, nearby nature, but also seek to foster an

awareness of and caring for this nature”. Beatley (2013) also advocates the enhancement

of social and landscape resilience, which can be achieved by the ‘Biophilic Urbanism’ as

it is stated in his published article “Biophilic Cities are Sustainable, Resilient Cities”.

13
 In the book Biophilic and Bioclimatic Architecture, Almusaed (2011) defines

Biophilic Architecture as “a part of an innovative view in architecture”. In this view;

nature, life, and architectural theory are incorporated to fulfill demands, constraints, and

respect in a livable building component for both parties – people and the environment.

Alex Wilson (2006) emphasizes the Biophilic Design philosophy in his article

published in Building Green – an organization providing informative publications and

consulting services. He suggests a broad table, listing particular strategies on the purpose

of “bringing buildings to life”. Wilson’s table, called a Sampling of Biophilic Design

Strategies, suggests a guideline for designers under the categories of general, landscape

and site design, building design, and interior design. In each category he gives tips for

design process and explanation of them.

A few authors in the last decades have tried to define the specifics of ‘Biophilic

Design’ to establish a greater understanding of the concept. Kellert (1997; 2005)

organizes the Range of Biophilic Values in such condensations; aesthetic, dominionistic,

humanistic, moralistic, naturalistic, negativistic, scientific, symbolic, and utilitarian.

Kellert (2008) puts forward the two dimensions of the Biophilic Design: 1) organic or

naturalistic, 2) place-based or vernacular. He also lists the ‘Six elements and seventy

attributes of Biophilic Design’. These six elements are listed as ‘environmental features’,

‘natural shapes and forms’, ‘natural patterns and processes’, ‘light and space’, ‘place-

based relationships’, ‘evolved human-nature relationships’ in his book Biophilic Design

(Kellert, Heerwagen, & Mador, 2008).

Heerwagen and Hase (2001) suggest including positive ‘biophilic features’ and

excluding ‘biophobic alliances ’in life habitats referring the building environments. They

14
suggest a set of characteristics to Biophilic Design, published by U.S. Green Building

Council. These characteristics are listed as; prospect, refuge, water, biodiversity, sensory

variability, biomimicry, sense of playfulness, enticement. Afterwards, Heerwagen and

Gregory (2008) come up with the “Seven attributes of nature” – ‘sensory richness’,

‘motion’, ‘serendipity’, ‘variations on a theme’, ‘resilience’, ‘sense of freeness’,

‘prospect and refuge’ – aiming to evoke qualities of nature in architecture through;

‘light’, ‘color’, ‘movement patterns’, ‘openings and enclosures’, ‘air’, ‘materials’,

‘connections to nature’, and ‘spatial definition’.

The ‘Biophilia and Biophilic Design,’ as the new branch of sustainability, with

the benefits proven in ongoing academic studies, has started to take place in big

companies’ research and white papers. A non-profit organization The Rocky Mountain

Institute (RMI), centering on sustainability, has published a list of Biophilic Design

attributes to incorporate natural systems in built environments. The attributes they list

are: ‘dynamic and diffuse daylight’, ‘frequent, spontaneous, and repeated contact with

nature at built environments’, ‘local and natural materials’, ‘connection between interior

and exterior surfaces’, ‘natural ventilation’, ‘direct physical connection and access to

nature from interior spaces’ (Griffin, 2004). Carnegie Mellon University and RMI have

reported that green building features such as ‘views to outdoors’ and ‘daylighting’ boost

productivity (Wilson, 2006).

The Terrapin Bright Green is an organization that focuses on transformative

actions for society, providing high performance solutions to reach companies’

environmental, financial, and social goals. This organization acknowledges the Biophilic

Design in architecture and urban planning to improve health and wellbeing. Terrapin

15
Bright Green’s environmental strategies include ecosystem integration (phoebe) and

technologic developments to strengthen local ecosystem services and reduce risks and

costs while increasing revenues. Partnering with diverse experts from all over the world,

the organization publishes many research reports, white papers, and articles in diverse

fields ranging from psychology to material science in order to engage the community and

inform companies’ projects. Their white paper “The Economics of Biophilia: Why

Designing with Nature in Mind Makes Sense” (2012) and the report “14 Patterns of

Biophilic Design: Improving Health and Well-Being in the Built Environment”

(Browning, Ryan, & Clancy, 2014) have been influential references for other

organizations and authors (retrieved from www.terrapinbrightgreen.com).

Another large company that adopts the notion of Biophilic Design is Interface.

The company aims to achieve sustainability within all its dimensions – people, place,

process, product, and profits – to become restorative through the power of influence.

Besides producing a nature-inspired product line, Interface publishes reports researching

the issue on a global scale: “Human Spaces: The Global Impact of Biophilic Design in

the Workplace” (2015) and “EMEA (Europe, Middle East & Africa) Human Spaces”

(2014). These reports center upon ‘productivity’ and ‘wellbeing’ in workspaces, based on

the research including 7,600 employee surveys in 16 countries. The company also has

websites to release information to the public on the issues of “happiness, productivity and

creativity in the workplace.” These websites are available with the names of: “Reconnect:

Inspired by a Common Desire to Reconnect People and Spaces with Nature”, and

“Human Spaces: Spaces Designed with the Human in Mind” (retrieved from

www.interfaceglobal.com, www.interfacereconnect.com & www.humanspaces.com).

16
 As a result of their decades worth of work, research and literature analysis, Kellert

and Calabrese (2015) published the most recent and distilled ‘Biophilic Design

Framework’ in an article “The Practice of Biophilic Design”. The article is published in

the website www.biophilic-design.com to bring forth public awareness to the design

disciplines. This work primarily brings forward the Biophilic Design principles which

represent the required essential conditions to be adhered to consistently in the process of

design for the successful operations of projects. The ‘Principals of Biophilic Design’

(Kellert and Calabrese, 2015, p. 6-7) is listed in Table 2.1. Furthermore, the ‘Biophilic

Design Framework’ (Kellert & Calabrese, 2015, p. 9) provides design strategies referred

to as the ‘experiences and attributes’, which would guide the creation of organic habitats.

The Application of Biophilic Design – Biophilic Design Framework (Kellert

& Calabrese, 2015, p. 9). Kellert and Calabrese (2015) argue that operating the

Biophilic Design necessitates the application of a range of strategies. These

strategies are referred to as the ‘experiences and attributes’ in the ‘Biophilic

Design Framework’, which are the study variables of this research. Certain

variances such as; ‘project’s context and limitations’, ‘specific building and

landscape uses’, ‘project size’, ‘financial, logistical and authoritative drivers’,

along with ‘ecological and cultural conjunctures’ necessarily bind the choice of

applications to operate. To achieve “an overall integrated ecological whole”, they

underline the importance of ‘unity of various applications’, which are

complimentary to one another. The ‘Biophilic Design Framework’, Kellert and

Calabrese (2015, p.10) put forward, is shown in Table 2.2. The ‘experiences and

attributes’ defined in the Framework provide “multisensory encounters with

17
 nature in the built environment” (p.11) through the senses of sound, touch, taste,

smell, sight, and movement.

Benefits of Biophilia and Biophilic Design

Human affinity towards nature from past to present can be seen in various

cultures. Ancient Roman citizens often contacted nature to defy urban noise and

congestion (Glacken, 1967). Remains of Pompeii ruins and ancient Egypt tomb paintings

prove that people interacted with plants in their garden and houses (Manaker 1996). In

Europe’s first hospitals, i.e. infirmaries in monastic communities, gardens are conceived

as a crucial part of the environment assisting in the healing process (Gerlach-Spriggs &

Kaufmann, 1998 ). Up to date research and insights from the neurosciences,

endocrinology and other fields have advanced development of the scientific base for

Biophilic Design (Ryan et al., 2014).

In 1984, Roger S. Ulrich publishes positive results in his research article “View

through a Window May Influence Recovery from Surgery.” This inspires the following

research exploring the health benefits of connection with nature. Ulrich conducts his

study between 1972 and 1981 in a suburban Pennsylvania hospital, and the study is

executed to determine if assignment to a room with a window view of a natural setting

might have restorative effects. The results display shorter postoperative hospital stays,

fewer negative evaluative comments, and less need for potent analgesics for the 23

patients assigned to rooms with windows viewing the natural scene, compared to 23 other

matched patients in similar rooms with windows toward a brick building wall (Ulrich,

1984).

18
 The other early and often cited empirical study of Ulrich et al. (1991) is “Stress

Recovery during Exposure to Natural and Urban Environments.” It proves the predictions

of psycho-evolutionary theory on the recuperative effects of nature. In this research,

attendees’ levels of stress are measured based on a self-rating system and changes in

muscle tension, pulse transit time (related to systolic blood pressure), heart period, and

skin conductance. Findings of the study show positive changes to emotional mode,

physiological activity levels, and sustained attention/intake comparing the attendees’

exposure to natural and urban environments. It is noteworthy that physiological stress

recovery rates from ‘nature’ are significantly faster than rates from ‘artificial urban

environments’ as shown in Figure 2.1.

Ulrich explains the possible relationship between Biophilic Design and the

Distraction theory to alleviate pain (as cited in Wilson, 2006, p.13). He also points out

importance of natural light, which increases serotonin concentration and provides

prevention of pain pathways in the central nervous system by these neurotransmitters:

Exposure to nature appears to reduce pain through different types of mechanisms,

including distraction and stress reduction. Distraction theory holds that pain

absorbs attention; the more attention devoted to pain, the greater the experienced

intensity. If patients are diverted by or become engrossed in a pleasant nature

view, they allocate less attention to pain, and accordingly the intensity is

reduced…A second mechanism is suggested by the well-documented finding that

viewing nature effectively lowers stress. When stress is lessened, levels of stress

19
 hormones, such as norepinephrine, often are lowered as well, and this may

alleviate the experienced intensity of pain. (p. 13)

Another empirical study conducted at a college lab confirms the results from

Ulrich’s researches. After monitoring blood pressure and emotions of participants during

a simple timed computer task in the presence and absence of plants the research finds

that:

[…] the participants were more productive (12% quicker reaction time on the

computer task) and less stressed (systolic blood pressure readings lowered by one

to four units). Immediately after completing the task, participants in the room with

plants present reported feeling more attentive (an increase of 0.5 on a self-

reported scale from one to five) than people in the room with no plants. (Lohr,

Pearson-Mims & Goodwin, 1996)

As cited in Kaplan and Kaplan (1989), after a study of recuperation of patients in

6 different physical medicine and rehabilitation environments based on quality of the

view from their windows, Verderber (1986) proves the quality of view is a positive factor

in the healing process.

The Health Council of the Netherlands Nature and Health (2004) reports research

on the relationship between health indicators and being close to nature. The report

indicates that for personal development and a sense of purpose, nature is an important

element. The Health Council believes that “nature can assist in sense of purpose in a

symbolic sense, by pointing people towards ‘deeper’ convictions and values”. Supporting

these views, other recent medical studies show the correlation between cardiovascular

20
and respiratory diseases and contact with nature (Donovan et. al., 2013; Richardson

&Mitchell, 2010; Tamosiunas, Grazuleviciene, & Luksiene et al., 2014).

After a review of more than 200 empirically published studies, Wolf, Kruger, and

Rozance (2014) prepare the “Stress, Wellness &Physiology” report to show that “nature

experiences provide an antidote to stress and support general wellness, offering

restorative experiences that ease the mind and heal the body.” In the report, Wolf et al.

(2014) points out the physiological and psychological benefits of forest walking and

breathing. The findings show a decrease in blood glucose levels for diabetic patients

(Ohtsuka, Yabunaka, & Takayama, 1998), and levels of stress indicators i.e. systolic

blood pressure, noradrenaline, and cortisol (Park et al., 2010). Additional findings reveal

a decrease of negative feelings, acute emotions such as depression and boredom, and an

increase of positive emotions (Morita et al., 2007; Tsunetsugu et al. 2013), as well as an

increase in the activity level of virally infected body cells and tumor rejecting immune

system cells (Li et al. 2010).

Another empirical study on human psychophysiological response to window

views and indoor plants in workplace environments proves that people are less nervous or

anxious when the view of nature and/or indoor plants are present (Chang & Chen, 2005).

In their research article “Children with Attention Deficit Concentrate Better after

Walk in the Park”, Taylor and Kuo (2009) validate that twenty minutes of walking in a

nature setting improves attention attainment relative to other settings. The findings

suggest that natural environments can increase attention in the general population as well

as in ADHD populations (Taylor & Kuo, 2009).

21
 An experimental study titled “Psychological Benefits of Indoor Plants in

Workplaces: Putting Experimental Results into Context” was conducted by Bringslimark,

Hartig, and Patil (2007) to see if a correlation existed between ‘indoor plants’ and

‘different physical and psychosocial workplace factors’. Evaluated physical workplace

factors in the study include lighting, noise, air quality, temperature, perceived stress, sick

leave, and productivity. Psychosocial workplace factors include demands, social support,

control, gender, and age variables. Study results show that the ‘presence of indoor plants

close to a worker's desk’ has statistically reliable associations with ‘less sick leave’ and

‘increase in productivity’.

In the study “The Effect of Interior Planting on Health and Discomfort among

Workers and School Children” it is found that the presence of plants and full-spectrum

lighting lowers health and discomfort symptoms up to 21% to 25% compared to

environments without plants. In addition to that, neuropsychological symptoms (fatigue

and headache) and mucous membrane symptoms (dry and hoarse throat) appear to be

affected (Fjeld, 2000).

The benefits of a relationship with nature and other species have also been

discussed in literature regarding child development. Richard Louv (2008) refers to studies

that correlate ‘adults’ creativity’ with ‘time spent with nature during childhood’ (as cited

in Wilson, 2006). Louv also suggests that the nature deficit disorder associates with a

rising number of cases such as; obesity, attention disorders, and depression in children (as

cited in Grinde & Patil, 2009). In the book Children and Nature: Psychological,

Sociocultural, and Evolutionary Investigations Aaron Katcher (2002) points out that

animals can provide help to children suffering from autistic-spectrum disorders.

22
 In a more recent study titled “Biophilia: Does Visual Contact with Nature Impact

on Health and Well-Being?” Grinde and Patil (2009) question if reduction of natural

elements based on the growing dominancy of artificial ones in cities and indoor

environments have a negative effect on the human mind. Crosschecking fifty significant

empirical studies regarding the topic, Grinde and Patil (2009, p. 2332-2343) conclude

that an environment lacking natural elements may act as a discord leading to improper

behavior, which in turn may have a negative effect as discussed earlier in this chapter.

Summary and Critique

Humans’ innate tendency to ‘nature and love of life and lifelike processes’ goes

back to human history. With the evolution of humans, behaviors and habitats, most

theories and research have begun to be developed in the late twentieth century. Due to

ever-changing life conditions on Earth and reduced connection with natural

environments, quality of life has suffered.

All this research has been brought forward and executed to raise concern and

influence peoples’ everyday actions. More importantly, this research is necessary in order

to influence global authorities to take action. The research has been conducted to prove

empirical evidences for humanity’s physical, mental and societal wellbeing, and it mostly

reveals positive results regarding the relationship between humans and nature. This

relationship has had repercussions in a variety of disciplines related to humans,

environment and other living beings. Conscious of the enormous responsibility to sustain

life, the theorists and researchers discuss the topic among diverse disciplines. They share

a common belief that the instinct of bio-affiliation leads to a better quality of life. Taking

part gradually in professional practices, companies and organizations, the research and

23
Biophilic Design applications promise to provide habitats which can fit better humans

biologically and sociologically. All in all, Wilson (2006) answers the question of why

‘design’ should be ‘Biophilic’:

We care about biophilia in building design—or we should care—for two primary

reasons. First, it is becoming increasingly well demonstrated that biophilic

elements have real, measurable benefits relative to such human performance

metrics as productivity, emotional well-being, stress reduction, learning, and

healing. And second, from an environmental standpoint, biophilic features foster

an appreciation of nature, which, in turn, should lead to greater protection of

natural areas, eliminate pollution, and maintain a clean environment. (p. 12)

24
 Chapter 3

Research Methodology

Research Questions

The research questions that guide this study include the following:

1. How do specific natural phenomena apply to the built environment within the

Framework of Biophilic Design and the Biophilia Hypothesis?

2. How can Biophilic Design concepts be defined in the study of the three research

sites?

3. How did the architects of the three case study residencies employ the Biophilic

Design Framework; is there evidence that their use of Biophilic Design principles

was applied intentionally or unintentionally?

4. How and why these case studies became reputable worldwide; are there any

correlations or connections between the overall success of the related projects and

Biophilic Design?

5. How are these principles of Biophilic Design evident in the case studies that can

be applied to projects, climates, regions or contexts?

Methods

Research methodology. This thesis provides a comparative analysis of the three

residential designs using the criteria in the ‘Biophilic Design Framework’ established by

Kellert and Calabrese (2015). In this research, the ‘Biophilic Design Framework’ is

analyzed on Taliesin West, Glass House, and Garden & House projects. Each selected

site has a different residential typology and parti, located in different contexts in order to

determine divergent and convergent interpretations of Biophilic patterns to provide

25
contribution to the Biophilia Hypothesis and the Biophilic Design Framework in the

existing literature. This thesis adopts a qualitative case study method to design and

compile collected data on selected buildings and the Biophilic Design Concept for the

study. The ‘comparative case study’ is considered as an explorative and contributive

strategy of analysis as it is defined in Encyclopedia of Case Study Research (2010):

The comparative case study examines in rich detail the context and features of

two or more instances of specific phenomena…The goal of comparative case

studies is to discover contrasts, similarities, or patterns across the cases. These

discoveries may in turn contribute to the development or the confirmation of

theory. (Campbell, 2010, p. 175)

Case study structure / Settings.

Context: Research sites and case studies. Each chosen architectural case study in

this research was designed and built in different time periods and locations around the

world; the United States of America, Brazil, and Japan by renowned architects. The case

studies included in this research are seen as similarly representative of Biophilic Design,

in that they share a clear connection with nature even though they have different

residential typology, parti, and environmental and climatic contexts. Eventually, how

well they respond to their environment was studied in this research.

In the U.S.A., the selected architectural case study is Taliesin West (1937-1959)

by architectural legend Frank Lloyd Wright, located in Scottsdale, Arizona (Figure 3.1).

Taliesin West, “reflects expansiveness of the desert”, and offers an insight to the utopic

desert residence (Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation). Construction of indigenous materials

26
and harmony of form with the surrounding lands make Taliesin unusual and unique

beyond its Biophilic features.

In São Paulo, Brazil, the selected case study the Glass House (1950-1951) was

designed and built by Italian-born Brazilian architect Lina Bo Bardi. The building

displays an explicit Biophilic character interwoven with surrounding rain forest (Figure

3.2). The Bardis aspired to protect the jungle when they purchased the property. The site

is an elegant upmarket suburb of Morumbi today, but still there is enough jungle on the

hillside to serve as a reminder of the original wilderness (Heathcote, 2014). Over the

years the building has disappeared, nestling into the treetops and being surrounded by

grown forest around the building structure (Weintraub, & Hess, 2010). The origin picture

of the building published in the 1950s shows its open character (Figure 3.3).

In Japan, the selected case study Garden & House (2006-2011) is located in a

dense commercial and historic neighborhood of central Tokyo. This studio-residence was

designed by Ryue Nishizawa and sits on four meters of wide building lot surrounded by

high towers over thirty meters in height. The architect’s decision to create a building

without walls and use plants to penetrate into the house (Figure 3.4) epitomizes Biophilic

Design in a micro (interior) and macro (urban) scale.

Criteria for site selection. The case study sites located in the USA, Brazil, and

Japan were selected based upon their differences in environment, climate, culture, and

location to ensure independency between comparable data. Interdependency was required

to observe application possibilities of the Biophilic Design variables in different

conditions as well. Thus, to enable better comparison between the case studies, each

project site was selected from residential projects, which are typologically different.

27
 Variables. The three kinds of ‘experiences’ of nature in the ‘Biophilic Design

Framework’ (Kellert and Calabrese, 2015), namely; the direct experience of nature, the

indirect experience of nature, and the experience of space and place are analyzed in each

case study. These three areas of analyses contribute to this research as study variables.

Variable 1 offers a greater understanding of the direct experience of nature within

the case studies. The ‘eight attributes’ of the direct experience of nature explored within

the Variable 1 are: natural light, air, water, plants, animals, weather, natural landscapes

and ecosystems, and fire.

Variable 2 focuses on the indirect experience of nature within the case studies.

The ‘ten attributes’ of the indirect experience of nature explored within Variable 2 are:

images of nature, natural materials, natural colors, simulating natural light and air,

naturalistic shapes and forms, evoking nature, information richness, age /change /and the

patina of time, natural geometries, and biomimicry.

Variable 3 explores ‘attributes’ of the experience of space and place within the

case studies. The ‘six attributes’ of the experience of space and place to be analyzed

within Variable 3 are: prospect and refuge, organized complexity, integration of parts to

wholes, transitional spaces, mobility and way finding, and cultural and ecological

attachment to place.

Research diagram.

Case study structure is displayed in Table 3.1, and it compares the project sites

and research variables.

Data collection and limitations. Information was collected via Arizona State

University’s library, catalog, indexes, and Google Scholar. The actual project sites could

28
not be observed first hand due to the budget limitations of the study. Varied locations of

these projects in different countries are the limitations of this study.

Ethnographic observations. To analyze according to research variables, the

ethnographic observations were conducted on the project sites physically and through

photographs from the literature. Locational proximity of Taliesin West to Arizona State

University allowed access for direct observations of the physical site together with photos

of the site which were taken during an observational tour in addition to the literature

review. The same research process of collecting visual data from the substantial literature

applies as well to Glass House and Garden & House projects.

Content analyzes. Each site was evaluated using literature review and historical

background to establish content and descriptive, analytical, and comparative research.

Then each site was evaluated against the variables, and a description was developed for

each variable for each site. The descriptions were analyzed, and findings were compared

to determine if there were design principles that could be derived from the evident

findings from each site.

29
 Chapter 4

Data Analyzes, Findings and Discussions

Taliesin West, Phoenix, U.S.A. (1937-1959)

Just imagine what it would be like on top of the world looking over the universe
at sunrise or at sunset with clear sky in between. Light and air bathing all the
worlds of creation in all the color there ever was – all the shapes and outlines ever
devised – neither let nor hindrance to imagination – nothing to imagine – all
beyond the reach of the finite mind. Well, that was our place on the mesa and our
buildings had to fit in. (Wright, 1943, p. 453)

In the light of Wright’s 70 years of design works, researchers, scholars, and

architectural historians classify four design concepts structured on the basis of Wright’s

Organic Architecture theory; ‘Nature of the Site’, ‘Destruction of the Box’, ‘Methods and

Materials’, and ‘Building for Democracy’ (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright

Foundation, 1993, p.1). These design concepts and his Organic Architecture theory,

which reflects Wright’s design ideology, associate with the Hypothesis of Biophilia and

Biophilic Design in principle. Looking more closely at each ‘attribute’ of the Biophilic

Design ‘experiences’ within the perspective of Wright’s ideology, it is possible to

identify a correlation, which materializes as concrete evidence in Taliesin West.

Taliesin west: An interpretive guide: In the realm of ideas (1993) provides data

and a historical background for this study; it as an enlightening guideline to understand

the essence of constructive typology of Taliesin West and Wright’s established

ideologies. These ideologies arrive at a level of mastery in Taliesin West. Referred direct

quotes in this section authenticate historical evidences from Wright and his apprentice

Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer who is the author of the Frank Lloyd Wright: Selected Houses and

the director of the Frank Lloyd Wright Archives at Taliesin West. To convey the real
30
ideas and intentions behind each well-thought-through design application in Taliesin

West, a dialogue is created with the architect through the study. This significantly helps

to analyze research data: Biophilic features of Taliesin West. This guideline contributes

to the evaluation of the research variables to establish descriptive and analytical data

valorization for the research.

Taliesin West, a National Historic Landmark in the U.S.A., has World Heritage

status. The construction starts in 1937 in the Sonoran Desert, Arizona. The project

(Appendix A) has been Wrights’ and his fellowships’ winter camp, used as a house and a

lab to experience how to harmonize and respond to nature and the desert environment.

With this mind of design, modifications and additions continuously keep entraining the

building until the architect’s death in 1959 (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright

Foundation, 1993, p.1). Wright’s experimentalist and strategic approach characterizes

Taliesin West, allowing it to be an organism growing in relationship with its ecosystem.

Robert Campbell appreciates Wright’s design manifestation, especially pointing out the

Taliesins of Wright: “Wright’s best work always seems to be in process, as alive as a

forest, open to change and growth” (as cited in Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright

Foundation, 1993, p. 5) Campbell attributes the success of the architect’s work to his

specific approach to nature:

It is often said that architecture can either be an imitation of nature (like Hopi

villages, heaping up like mesas) or be a man-made foil to nature (like Greek

temples, crisp and geometric.) But a typical Wright work is both. (as cited in

Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 5)

31
 Wright (1939) defines the nature of architecture as a live organic creature in his

own words: “Architecture is that great living creative spirit which from generation to

generation, from age to age, proceeds, persists, creates, according to the nature of man,

and his circumstances as they change.” This ‘great living creative spirit’ intended to

evolve over time, refers to the indirect experience of nature; featuring ‘attributes’ like the

age, change and the patina of time, and the information richness to man. It is clearly seen

that Wrights’ architecture is on a same doctrinal ground mentioned in the Biophilia

Hypothesis and Biophilic Design, both of which talk about experience and memory in

continuous evolution. The merit or dignity underlying every architectural work of art

comes to light if it is valued by the notion of time. It collects traces of memories and

informative processes by humans, context and culture. Then, its success is proven as long

as its spirit is alive and responsive to man.

The ‘Spirit’ or ‘soul’ is frequently mentioned by the architect as the basis not only

for architecture, but also for a ‘sites nature’ as well. Because nature at the project site

lives and grows; and his architecture does too. This abstract notion of nature in Wright’s

ideology and his intellectual insight is different than physical ‘nature’ and surrounding

environmental elements, which contribute to his vision for architecture. Concentration of

these powers creates the live body of his work, its soul and visible essence, bones and

structures, timeless spirit molded by and with cultural and ecological existences. That is

to say Taliesin is an intellectual property blending the architectural spirit with ‘nature’.

Wright abides by this essence throughout the design and construction process of

Taliesin West. He does not want to lose anything on the site that charms him before the

construction starts. Wright writes that “architectural association accentuates the character

32
of the landscape, if the architecture is right” (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright

Foundation, 1993, p. 10). Hereby his specific approach to the site addresses the direct

experience of nature by its ‘attributes’ of the natural landscapes and ecosystems, and the

cultural and ecological attachment to place. Wright’s protective approach to the site

context promotes the unity of natural landscapes and ecosystems to enrich “the life and

lifelike processes” as defined in the Biophilia Hypothesis. He respectfully treats the

existent cultural and ecological values to prevent possible impairments. The resultants

accommodate the occupants’ direct experience of nature in a modern civilization as it

was set forth by the architect.

Through extensive surveys and research on the project site, Wright finds the

Hohokam Indians’ rock art carved on boulders. These cultural elements in the context are

protected and incorporated throughout Taliesin property. These ancient petroglyphs and

pictographs emblematize the celebration of cultures’ meeting on the same land,

epitomizing Taliesin West’s cultural attachment to place. Wright memorializes the art

and culture of the Hohokam people, who inhabited the region around 300-1500 C.E. One

of these creative petroglyphs inspires the architect to design the logo for The Frank Lloyd

Wright Foundation (FLLWF). This logo, stylized by the architect, has influences of the

Hohokam’s cryptic figures on its associated lines, which represent Taliesin Fellowship

and apprentices (Figure 4.1.a, and 4.1.b).

To attribute the naturally raising form of desert, Wright uses the surrounding

indigenous natural materials from the site of Taliesin West. He creates a revolutionary

experience by doing so: “I was struck by the beauty of the desert, by the dry, clear sun-

drenched, air, by the stark geometry of the mountains; the entire region was an inspiration

33
in strong contrast to the lush, pastoral landscape of my native Wisconsin” (Wright, Lucas,

& Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 10). The design process of Taliesin West is

dictated by the inspiring information richness found in nature; Wright elaborately

analyzes the topography, movement of sun, approach to the site, site’s natural

characteristics such as formation of the rocks, the trees and more thoroughly lays the

groundwork for an optimum direct experience of nature (Figure 4.2). Pfeiffer (1989)

elucidates Wright’s approach, which designates the site orientation of Taliesin West and

embodies the ecological attachment to place, consideration of movement of the sun,

direction of mountain, valley, and vistas as contextual datum lines:

The site and its relation to the mountain range to the north dictated the orientation

of the plan. The axis is derived from this extended view, from the west, looking

east….No building, if Mr. Wright could help it, was ever placed on a direct north-

south axis. If it were, he explained to us, the building would have a permanently

hot side (south) and a cold side (north). By tilting the plan off the direct compass

points the sun and shade had their play throughout all the rooms and vistas

throughout the year. Taliesin West was planned with the same object in mind. The

prow, an extended terrace with sunken garden, points south by southwest, looking

over Paradise Valley and to the Camelback Mountains in Scottsdale at the other

side of the valley. (Pfeiffer 1989; Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright

Foundation, 1993, p. 12)

In 1929 “Ocatilla” camp notes, Wright describes his excitement envisioning the

scene: “now, when all these white canvas wings, like sails, are spread, the buildings will

look something like ships coming down the mesa, rigged like ships balanced in the

34
breeze” (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 10). His fantastic

depictions at the beginning of their wild adventure in Sonoran Desert denote the indirect

experience of nature and the evoking nature ‘attribute’ of the Biophilic Design. Drawing

an analogy of white sails on the endless open seas, Wright designs the site plan

resembling a prow in the uninterrupted endless desert. Wright’s apprentice Pfeiffer

(1989), explains “the term ‘prow,’ used by the architect from the very inception of the

plan, once again brings the simile of a ship on the desert into focus, as it was with the

little cabins of Ocatilla –‘like a fleet of little ships…” (Pfeiffer 1989; Wright, Lucas, &

Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 12). This nature evoking inspiration found by

Wright could be explained by the endlessness of the ocean-like flat desert topography

(Figure 4.3). Pfeiffer (1989) adds to that:

The desert foliage resembles, in many ways the types of growth found on the

ocean floors. Staghorn and Cholla cactus resemble more the strange shapes and

forms of coral than the type of trees and foliage found in either temperate or

tropical zones. Once again, we have this analogy to the sea, and Taliesin West,

with its sloping stone and concrete prow, does indeed resemble an abstract ship

set afloat on this desert ‘sea’. (Pfeiffer 1989; Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd

Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 13)

Compromising with desert nature, the dominant architectural theme in the

horizontally elongated low silhouette of Taliesin West consists of striking, bold forms of

angular masonries; deep exposed upward beams of wood; and steel slanted rooflines

support delicate translucent materials on top. This echoes the naturalistic shapes and

forms in the evoking nature of the desert environment; mountains in the background and

35
metaphoric white canvasses breeze in the ocean-like flat surface. Expansiveness of the

transitional spaces i.e. open spacious terraces, promenades and courts in the Taliesin

West facility typifies the immense desert characteristic and presents discernable

transitions (Figure 4.4). These clear pathways connect the expanded structures on the

land, and create an organized and sometimes mysterious mobility and wayfinding with

the little secluded focus gardens interspersed between building volumes (Figure 4.5). To

assure a direct experience of nature nearby and at a distance Wright compromises with

the desert context (Figure 4.6), intertwining the paths into the landscape, water elements,

fireplaces, courts, endemic desert flora and fauna. In a deferential compliance with the

desert’s land form, he ingeniously sets each building component into the smooth slopes

of site and elevates them on platforms. Wright calculates based on critical datum points

of elevations and develops the survey and grading plan of Taliesin West. The

modifications on the land with smooth ‘fills’ and ‘digs’ formalize the topography of

Taliesin West (Spirn et al., 1996, p.152).

Meaningful experience of space and place can be achieved through the

integration of parts to wholes as indicated by Kellert and Calabrese (2015) in their study.

Such efficacious navigation of environments created by clear transitions connects each

component fluently. Pfeiffer (1989) depicts the intention of design unity at Taliesin West,

which operates the ‘attribute’ integration of parts to wholes incorporating transitional

spaces and other elements:

Each of the spaces at Taliesin West has its own character and its own architectural

form, but all combine together into one integrated whole. It is, therefore, a

36
 building composed of many buildings linked together by terraces, walkways and

courtyards. The orientation out to the southwest looks over sunken gardens, a

triangular pool, and finally the prow itself. (Pfeiffer 1989; Wright, Lucas, & Frank

Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 13)

The main axis of the facility (Figure 4.7) extends from Wright’s office through

the southeast-northwest by a broad walk, scored by joints in 16 feet modules divided by 8

feet, and 5 feet 4 inch patterns (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993).

The replication of this self-similar two and three unit patterns in this hierarchically

organized module creates a rhythm on the principle axle. It could be noted that operating

mathematical properties in variety and similarity are frequently found in nature –such as

natural fractals. It also could be speculated that Wright includes and integrates the

‘attribute’ natural geometries; which is aesthetically and naturally coherent, makes it

easy on the eye, and creates the indirect experience of nature.

Another applied ‘attribute’ of the experience of space and place is created at the

big red crossbeams — a pergola covering the main axis. These repeating crossbeams

above the broad walk (main axis) create clear, discernable, and accentuated transitional

space. They provide a connection and coherence as referred to in organized complexity

attribution of Biophilic space and place experience (Figure 4.8).

The indirect experience of nature is also sustained through natural materials.

Wright favors working with them all the time. He manifests the nature of material in the

interior and the exterior with the structures of buildings and furniture elements (Figure

4.9). In Taliesin West, Wright never treats or processes any of the natural materials to

preserve inherent quality and to expose their natural beauty: “To be modern simply

37
means that all materials are used honestly for the sake of their own qualities” (Wright,

Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, pp. 15-16). He suggests designers

appreciate the nature of materials at all times: “Bring out the nature of the materials, let

their nature intimately into your scheme. Reveal the nature of the wood, plaster, brick or

stone in your designs; they are all by nature friendly and beautiful” (Wright, Lucas, &

Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, pp. 15-16). This explains his usage of untreated

redwood in interiors and within structures of the building.

The construction materials of Taliesin are; native rocks, stones, and sand from the

desert washes gathered from the original site. Taliesin West had been an experimental lab

in nature for Wright. The ‘Desert Masonry’ was discovered in this lab while the architect

was experimenting with the techniques of using native materials (Figure 4.10). Pfeiffer

(1989) writes about their experience with Desert Masonry:

It was from the variety of the colors and shapes that the wall took its character,

truly mosaic-like, as a whole. Throughout all of this heavy construction, it was the

artistic and carefully chosen placement of the stones that determined the resultant

beauty of the wall as a whole. When a particular stone’s surface was not

absolutely flat, with the possibility of the concrete running down onto the face of

the stone, Mr. Wright directed us to place round river stones, called “goose-eggs”

along the upper part of the face stone to prevent the seepage of the wet concrete

onto the surface. Again, in this solution came a startling result of jagged angular

large face stones lined with an edge of these small smooth rocks, usually lavender

and grey in color. The contrast of the two produces a kind of melodic and

38
 rhythmic play across the walls of the buildings. (Pfeiffer 1989; Wright, Lucas, &

Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, pp. 15-16)

Wright’s appreciation to the ‘attribute’ age, change and patina of the time could

be observed in the concrete surface of the walls indented with stretched thin lines as they

exist on canyon walls naturally (Figure 4.11). Wright’s inspiration and effort to create a

Biophilic ‘attribute’ such as evoking nature by mimicking the naturalistic shape and

forms could be seen from their experiments noted by his apprentice:

On an outing the Fellowship made to northern Arizona into one of the canyons

which had once been under water, the deep, horizontal grooves, in the stone

canyon walls caused by water erosion greatly appealed to Mr. Wright. On his

return to camp he instructed the apprentices building the walls to insert triangular

strips of wood stretching in thin lines on the inside surface of the wooden forms

prior to placing stones and pouring concrete. When the forms were removed the

indentation of the horizontal strips left an impression within the concrete surface

of the wall, creating yet another element with which the sun could make deep

shadow lines across the mosaic wall. This element of the sun and shadow was,

from the beginning of construction, an important design consideration throughout

Taliesin West. (Pfeiffer 1989; Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation,

1993, p. 16)

Another application inspired at the site surveys is noted by Wright upon his desert

observations: “in all this astounding desert there is not one hard undotted line to be seen”

(Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993). He decides to place this

evoking ‘attribution’ of nature to create the effect of naturalistic shape and forms.

39
Thereupon, he uses redwood cubic dentils on the side of linear fascia boards. These 2" by

2" dentils, cut by with 4" intervals, runs through the buildings’ skin (Wright, Lucas, &

Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993). A striking architectural feature created by

playing with shadow and light displays moments in motion, and movement of nature in

time (Figure 4.12).

Wright’s Office, the Garden Room, and the Drafting Studio’s ceilings were

designed to afford natural light from the sky. Wright tests many techniques and materials

at the roofs of Taliesin. He believes the benefits of natural light as it is indicated in

today’s scientific research results. Thus the natural light assists the work environments

(Figure 4.13) in Taliesin West (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993).

A number of experiments in Taliesin West are conducted around the idea of

coalescence of “delicate light-filled overhead” on great low masonries. Access of natural

light is a prominent ‘attribute’ for the direct experience of nature. Pfeiffer (1989) portrays

Wright’s design of natural light in the Garden Room (Figure 4.14):

The high side of the Garden Room was planned to look out to the east, the sun’s

early morning rays filling the room with sparkling light, the late afternoon sun

hitting the canvas and illuminating the interior with a luscious golden light.

(Pfeiffer 1989; Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 13)

Wright abides by the idea of stretched white canvas over the redwood frames. He

continuously redesigns the roof structure with regular repair and replacements. The

architect also tests new materials including plastic rubber fabrics to be replaced with

40
canvas. In the end, new plastics take their place in the roof structures of Taliesin (Pfeiffer

1989; Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993).

In 1941, Wright was very decisive about keeping his tent-like concept’s natural

characteristics intact: “Not one inch of glass is going into Taliesin West. This is a tent-

like building, and glass has no place here at all!” As a positive aesthetic and technical

result of his experiments, in 1945, he decides to modify his initial idea about tents by

adding glass material into the structures: “The camp, when thus converted from canvas

overhead to glass, will not only be a bewilderingly beautiful thing, of which we may all

be justly proud, but glass will have invaded the desert spaces in a way and on a scale not

seen before…” (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993).

The reason for this dramatic shift in one of the prominent components of the

original idea —tent-like concept— could be the climate conditions of the Sonoran desert,

the resilience degree of tent-like materials or different conjunctures. However, the

implication of glass material on the project still demonstrates the dignified connection

between the building and nature. It can be conjectured that the canvas doors and

overheads, which took place in the initial design, could be a better solution in terms of

providing natural ventilation and enabling the building to breathe outside’s fresh air for a

direct experience of outside weather. However, the latter design implementation, which

uses glass material, serves better the prospect ‘attribute’ by providing improved vistas to

the picturesque outdoors like a ‘rim’. Wright’s gratification with glass for Taliesin could

be seen by looking at his 1949 scripts responding to the Sonoran desert: “a view over the

rim of the world” (Figure 4.15) (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993,

p. 13).

41
 Wright’s approach to the implication of glass material applies the Biophilic

experience of space and place as well as the direct experience of nature on the site. The

direct experience of nature provokes the sense of sight via light, water, plants, animals,

and natural landscape and ecosystems in addition to the perception of outside weather,

and air by the operable and stabilized glass windows, doors (Figure 4.16.a, and Figure

4.16.b), the clerestories and the top-light above (Figure 4.16.c, and 4.16.d). Natural light

coming from these openings creates better contrast with lighter and darker areas which

could be referred to here as the prospect and refuge ‘attribute’ of the experience of space

and place. Pfeiffer (1989) describes the new vibe of Taliesin West after the glass:

Thus glass came in as skylights above, set between trusses, mitred down onto

great beam ledges, along stone walls and in garden courts. The desert in all its

changing states –storms, desert devils, light and dark –was a constant spectacle

that could now be seen from within the buildings during cold winter weather.

(Pfeiffer 1989; Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 17)

Wright had always been a defiant of architecture cliché imposing the idea of an

‘enclosed box’. As a free natured man, he passionately started to explore how to

democratize the space: “I had to find out what was the cause of this imprisonment”

(Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 18). He thinks it is required

to change the ever moving society. Responding to these needs and favoring life to grow,

Wright appropriates the open plan, which allows commodiousness and flux to liberate

interior space. His approach, “Destroy the Box”, is meant to bring democracy and ease

the occupants of buildings physically, physiologically and psychologically (Wright,

Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 18). Even though there is an existent

42
hierarchic system in nature; such as anatomical, survival and developmental differences

in species, nature is equal to everybody and democratic in all aspects. Speculating the

existence of possible inspiration or not, one can still see the conceptual similarity

between Nature’s design and Wright’s ideologies.

His investigations taught him a technique of undergirding roof support at a distant

instead of at the corners of the room. This technique allowed him to unhitch the corner of

the building (Figure 4.17) and enabled inward and outward flux to the juxtaposed interior

rooms and landscape (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993). This

method totally changed the experience of space and place he was seeking. It also made it

possible to play with roof design which adds the prospect and refuge ‘attribute’ to the

independent and adjoined rooms. Intended flow towards the outside landscape also

allowed better direct experience of nature in the space, as he acknowledges in his

manifestations:

A true liberation of life and light within walls, a new structural integrity; outside

coming in; and the space within, to be lived in, going out […] Space outside

becomes a natural part of space within the building […] Walls are now apparent

more as humanized screens. They do define and differentiate, but never confine or

obliterate. A new sense of reality in building construction has arrived. (Wright,

Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 21)

Following the same sense, Wright did not apply any walls to the Drafting Studio

and the Garden Room. Roofs’ gravitational thrust is transferred to the piers and

masonries as bearing structures. Some wall screens are used for conjunction of interior

spaces. The porosity and permeability also was rendered by collapsible canvas flaps

43
before Wright’s adoption of glass material. This canvas method provided a complete

unity of the indoors and the outdoors in Taliesin, even in the harsh weather (Wright,

Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993). While providing a protection and a

shelter, canvas also allowed the direct experience of nature by means of weather and

fresh air ‘attributes’.

Either with canvas flaps or glass materials, findings from Taliesin West and its

context display the Biophilic ‘experiences’ in architectural space: “From looking out,

everywhere throughout the camp, were breathtaking vistas of mountains and mesas, or

views into enclosed courtyards with splashing fountains and green gardens” (Pfeiffer

1989; as cited in Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 13). The

quoted image of Taliesin West denotes the prospect and refuge, natural landscape and

ecosystems, water, and plant ‘attributes’ observed in Taliesin West through the vistas to

the outside.

An interesting detail in the records shows that a stone vault at the west end of the

96 by 30 feet Drafting Studio, designed to preserve drawings safely, is the only fully

enclosed area in Taliesin (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993). A

fireplace found at the east end of the Drafting Studio promotes the direct experience of

nature in the building, keeping interiors in touch with the natural surroundings (Figure

4.18). (One is not allowed to photograph this studio, because of the active work of

students and copyrights of the models inside.)

The kitchen, pantry and serving area are located adjacent to the east side of the

Drafting Studio in a tall square mass structure directed to the Dining Room and

breezeway (Figure 4.19). The 40 by 28 feet Dining Room, composed within the concept

44
of ‘interior within the exterior’, becomes legible by the definition of the environing

landscape and the building. Rooms, an apartment, and a terrace provide a view of the

valley from the south and west, above the dining area. Another apartment placed a half a

level down from the dining area faces the same direction (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd

Wright Foundation, 1993).

The Garden Room and Wrights’ Living Quarters are located in the south east

direction following the breezeway. The dominant architectural theme of Taliesin West is

seen in the structure of the Garden Room as well. The design development of the room

has always been in evolution until its intended spacious and well-lighted concept was

achieved. Joining two spaces together (56’ by 34’ and 34’ by 24’), the elongated Garden

Room is roofed by a sloping translucent ceiling (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright

Foundation, 1993). Wright’s subtle play with ceiling heights creates his intended

experience of space and place providing the refuge and prospect ‘attributes’ to the room.

The desert masonries get lower at one edge of the room. This aspect suggests the refuge

‘attribution’ by evoking feelings of safety and security (Figure 4.20). The built-in

furniture in the refuge part of the room directs the occupants view to the sky, the

mountains, and the hillside. The glass side of the room with raised edges of the ceiling

enlarges the view of the garden and horizon on the east and south sides. This provides a

perception of opportunity and danger, suggesting the prospect ‘attribute’ of Biophilic

Design (Figure 4.21). Small, warm, cozy spaces with a relatively lower level of light

under a low ceiling with open sides are described by Hildebrand (2008) as the interior

refuges. While the interior prospect is:

45
 […] larger in all dimensions, and more brightly lit, with views to the outside in

three directions. Each of these two spatial conditions can be seen, surveyed, and

accessed from the other […] But a view to an adjacent interior prospect is

essential. (Hildebrand, 2008)

He further explains that allowing the choice among both prospect and refuge in

any setting is important to space experience. This affords “a malleable surrounding that

can accommodate changing emotional needs” while creating more complex spatial

compositions (Hildebrand, 2008). These kind of satisfying organized complexities are

another desire for human beings when designed in connection and coherence at the built

environment, reminding them of natural settings.

A dominating feature at far end of the room, the fireplace not just provides a

direct experience of nature inside of the Garden Room, it also induces social interactions

by pulling people and gathering them around the fire (Figures 4.22). The social aspect of

the fireplace plays an important role in Wright’s architecture.

At the other end of the Garden Room (Figure 4.23), there is a 10 by12 feet patio,

designed as an intimate private living area for the Wrights. This space creates the contact

with weather, is a pleasing and stimulating ‘attribute’. A small bar, kitchen, pantry,

restroom, and suite of rooms is placed adjacent to this area, is called Wright’s Living

Quarter. Staff members’ apartments and office space are located to the far end of this

wing (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993).

46
 With a right angle to the Wrights’ Private Wing, Apprentice Court is placed in the

north east direction. This court, built by apprentices and students, consists of small

apartments, showers and restrooms, and a large swimming pool. At the end of the

principal axis where it meets the corner of Apprentice Court, a small rectangle building

appears called Kiva or Hogan Theater (Figure 4.24). This building has a small window,

and a built-in fireplace, and it is outfitted with a small cinema screen, risers, benches, and

ledges. Over time, it had been used as a lounge and library, and it currently serves as a

class and conference room. Its flat concrete and stone roof is used as a gathering area

structured on the masonry walls. This space is connected to the second floor apartment by

a concrete stone bridge (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993).

A square form building, designed as a shop and craft space opens to a sunlit yard.

It is located on the western side of the Entrance Court. The vertical masonry walls of the

building have openings to the outside. These openings provide natural ventilation and

visual connection to nature. In the 1950’s, Wright adds a long, tall masonry to the west

side of the shop to visually block the artificial view of the parking lot (Wright, Lucas, &

Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993). He defeats all kind of artificial distractions for an

enhanced direct experience of nature. The significance of the uninterrupted natural view

to Wright could be seen in a lost battle of 1940’s, when he wrote President Harry S.

Truman requesting power lines to be buried.

A cinema cabaret building called ‘Stone Gallery’ is located on the northern side

of the camp extending from Wright’s Office. The building was completed in 1951, and

later named as Cabaret Theatre (Figure 4.25). Complying with the horizontally elongated

47
low silhouette of Taliesin West, this half sunk building –walls, ceiling and benches– was

constructed out of reinforced concrete and stone structures (Wright, Lucas, & Frank

Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993). For the construction of Cabaret’s walls, Wright used

six-sided irregular hexagonal shaped rocks for an acoustical solution, which resulted in

success. The volume of the room was also developed in a hexagonal form for the

reflection, refraction and attenuation of voice. This space has no walls parallel or

perpendicular to each other. His reference to nature’s forms and functions to produce a

solution of acoustical quality allows for the operative and effective implication of

biomimicry. This creates an indirect experience of nature in acoustical and material

quality for the space.

The Cabaret entrance opens up to an enclosed garden with a wooden double-leaf

door. This adjustable door enables a smooth transition between interior and exterior and

leads to a direct connection to the water element which punctuates the entrance. The

higher end of the Cabaret houses a projection booth and a fireplace (Figure 4.26).

Wright’s repetitive use of fire elements throughout Taliesin West amplifies and

reinforces the direct experience of nature, in addition to its heating advantage. The

angled seats were designed ergonomically to human proportions and natural poses of the

body. These seats were built on a natural slope towards the orchestra pit, projection

screen, and a small stage placed in the down end of room. The lighting atmosphere of the

Cabaret could be a reminder of a star-studded night. A starry ambiance is created by the

miniature lights strung over wires hanging from the ceiling.

48
 The Music Pavilion was designed as a multipurpose hall with seating for 100

people (Figure 4.27). The Pavilion joined Taliesin West’s facilities in 1957. The steel

reinforced structure of the building is roofed with rigid, steel, reinforced wood frames

and translucent plastics. With the purpose of protecting the mountainous backdrop, the

same effort was exerted in the design of the building to keep a low silhouette through

Taliesin West.

Designing the building, Wright applied modules of a seven-foot unit rooted from

the size of universal seating row space; ‘three feet six inches’ (Wright, Lucas, & Frank

Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993). This creates a harmonic rhythm within the space and

architectural elements. Foam cushioned concrete seating rows of the Pavilion are raised

on the natural incline of desert topography (Figure 4.28). A wide stage below connects to

the exterior terraces by means of openings from both sides through the fabric doors. After

1962 fire, drawing and film storage, a library, music studios and offices are added to this

42 foot stage (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993).

An experimental structure, Sun Cottage, called “Sun Trap” between1938 to 1941,

consisted of sleeping spaces surrounding a fireplace and open patio. Formal typology of

this place was offering shady protection and a continuous prospect to people resting

inside, without a canopy on top of the structure. Up until the 1970’s, it was rebuilt and

redesigned due to the experiential character and light structure consisting mainly of steel

and wood decking (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993).

49
 Chapter 4

Data Analyzes, Findings and Discussions

Glass House, São Paulo, Brazil (1950-1951)

The problem was to create an environment that was ‘physically’ sheltered, i.e.,
that offered protection from the wind and the rain, but at the same time remained
open to everything that is poetic and ethical, even the wildest of storms. (Bo
Bardi, 1953)

This is how Lina Bo Bardi explained the Glass House when she built an epic

work on the shoulders of scenic Morumbi in 1951 (Appendix B). Connection with nature

and context has been a substantial doctrine for Bo Bardi’s architecture in the ‘interest

towards the relationship of interior to exterior’. Recognizing the essential need to reach a

deep ‘harmonious fusion’ of architecture and nature in the 1940s, she reveals her style

with her first articles written for the Italian specialist magazines Domus and Lo Stile. In

the article “Architettura e Natura. La casa nel paesaggio” (1943), discussions on this

‘fusion’ include the basics of architecture which bring the needs of life, i.e. light, air,

plants… It is remarkable that these referrals to nature also have been the basics of the

Biophilic Design to allow direct experience of nature in the built environment which

formally and hermeneutically inform the design of the Glass House (Figure 4.29). While

the ‘fusion’ suggested by Bo Bardi derives inspiration from primitive, traditional and

rural houses, the morphological and structural compositions are neither identical to

vernacular architecture, nor assimilated into the modernist movements of the time.

Within these contexts, in pursuit of revitalizing the diminishing values of purity, vitality

and spontaneity, the architect excludes herself from the naturalist and neo-realist

trajectories (Oliveira, 2006, p. 108-109). According to Olivia de Oliveira (2006), Bo

50
Bardi proposes it “as a direct and open provocation in the quest to dismantle the barriers

between architecture and nature, and to let ‘life flow’” (p. 118).

Following the design of her house in 1953, Bo Bardi expresses her intention to

produce a ‘document’ which “explains how to design shelter” in the Interiors and Habitat

magazines. ‘The idea of blending with the surroundings,’ which appears as one of the

basics of her architecture, emphasizes the importance of Biophilic Design principles even

in the early 1950’s. Bo Bardi remarks that “nowadays, nature and architecture are basic

elements for a healthy house” (Bo Bardi, 1953) alongside the published figures of the

Glass House (Oliveira, 2006, pp. 69-70). This approach of the architect holds explicit

Biophilic Design strategies. The ‘harmonic fusion’ that is consciously sought by Bo

Bardi through her architectural oeuvre calls for the attention to what exists, and responds

to the surroundings and landscape, above all human life – measurements and needs.

Architecture is both inspired and governed by nature, from which it receives the

materials and the instruments necessary to form it and give it harmony; nature

pacifies, and for this very reason the study of nature should be the primary source

for the study of architecture –the product and creation of man. (Bo Bardi, 1957; as

translated in Veikos, 2014, p. 67)

As a legacy for future architects, Bo Bardi illustrates invaluably momentous ideas

in the chapter “Nature and Architecture” of her seminal theory book Propaedeutic

Contribution to the Teaching of Architecture Theory (Habitat, Ltd. São Paulo, 1957)

(translated in Veikos, 2014). Citing ideas in her many other writings, and illustrating

numerous works from Frank Lloyd Wright in this chapter, Bo Bardi displays a certain

reference that shows Wright has been influential to her thoughts specifically on

51
humanized architecture and connecting with nature (Oliveira, 2006, p. 109). Cathrine

Veikos (2014, p. 1) asserts that Bo Bardi posits “the architect as no meek observer of the

natural world, but someone who “may construct, within the world as it is, a pattern of the

world as he would have it” (Scott, 1914; 1954, p. 179; as cited in Bo Bardi, 1957, p. 7)”

with a herald of new type of humanism which approaches to science in a pragmatic sense

(Bo Bardi reflects from Geoffrey Scott’s The Architecture of Humanism). This also

shows a clear parallelism to the concept of Biophilic Design, because it places humans in

the center of the hypothesis with their symbiotic relationships to other live sources, and it

suggests utilizing any kind of method, from primitive to state-of-the-art technology, to

meet the biologic and physical needs of humankind at an optimum level.

The numerous writings are fundamental to this section of the research so as to

understand typological features of the house and ideologies of Bo Bardi and her

architecture; not just for the Glass House, but for her artistic and architectural oeuvre. As

stated in Barry Bergdoll’s foreword to Zeuler R. Lima, Lina Bo Bardi (New Haven,

2013):

Her body of work resists any easy stylistic categorization as it moves from the

most inventive embrace of new technical and material possibilities to an

engagement with traditional means and images of building, not only from period

to period in her life, from region to region, or even from building to building, but

even within the same structure. (p. viii)

The comprehensive book The Architecture of Lina Bo Bardi: Subtle Substances

(Barcelona, 2006) by Olivia de Oliveira provides a significant part of the grounding data

required for this research. In this compilation, Oliveira (2006) presents a synthesis of

52
analyses from Lina Bo Bardi’s oeuvre based on her built works, theoretical texts, and

numerous writings. The collected data – ideas reflected in various books, papers and

images – for this study operates in a Fresnel lens, analogous to the ones developed for

light houses, by which a lighthouse becomes visible over greater distances.

Metaphorically, visible and invisible realms of Bo Bardi’s thoughts, practically reflected

upon the architecture of Glass House, become visible from far distances and find voices

around the world. It is also notable that the quotes from Bo Bardi and the academic

remarks written on the architect and Glass House help to construct vignettes in the frame

of Biophilia, as the variables are being analyzed in this case study.

Italian born and trained arhitect Bo Bardi (1914-1992) moves to Brazil shortly

after World War II with her husband, well-known Italian art dealer and journalist Pietro

Maria Bardi, in 1946. Leaving behind the degraded bourgeois civilization and politics of

that time in Italy, Maria Bardi accepts an offer to become director of the newly founded

Museu de Arte de São Paulo (MASP). During this time Bo Bardi also works on the

reconstruction and design of the new museum for years. Following the appointment as

director of MASP, Maria Bardi comes up with an idea of creating work-live studios to the

Instituto de Arte Contemporânea for visiting artists and their workshops in the outskirts

of São Paulo. This idea takes inspiration from the styles of the German Bauhaus

Meisterhäuser (Master houses) and US art schools, and it could be interpreted as a similar

concept operation of Frank Lloyd Wright’s Taliesin West. The natural beauty of

Morumbi and picturesque “green hills” with its state-of-the-art infrastructure is seen as an

ideal context for the Bardis to build the studios and their house. However, in 1949, their

53
plan moves in the direction of a residential house due to financial deficits and future

concerns for the Art Institute (Lina Bo Bardi 100: Brazil's alternative path to modernism,

2014, p.195; Lima, 2013, p. 54,55). The conceptual expectation that they have for the

project site is mentioned in later records: “They had expected their house to become a

larger studio for the museum and though that never happened, their home did become a

meeting place for many intellectuals and artists” (Lima, 2013, p. 55).

Wright and Bo Bardi both consider the human factor in the essence of

architecture, and serve this ideology by using nature as an architectural element/material.

In the magazine of the arts, Habitat, (the Bardis founded Habitat to pursue an educative

ideal in 1950 and to publish educated critical views on art, architecture, and culture), Bo

Bardi writes the article “First: Schools” (Primeiro: escolas, 1951, n. 04); in which she

thoroughly reveals her humanistic interest. The architect considers schools as the ‘first’

place; she means that it is a primer point to start forming and reforming human behavior

and the collective consciousness of a society. From her writings it could be interpreted

that nature is a good drive, and it helps form human behavior and perception; nature is

also a reminder of ‘humility’ in that it reveals the ‘real’ essence: “Let us start with

schools; if anything should be done to ‘reform’ men, then the first thing is to ‘form’

them” (Bo Bardi 1951, as cited in Lina Bo Bardi, 1994, p. 67). She believes the

attainability of a human being’s evolution and self-improvement begins with the right

form of schools:

The premise of buildings being built as school houses, at first sight, appears to

transcend the architectural problem, but nevertheless it is very closely connected

54
 to it. Schools should be expressed according to the forms of contemporary

architecture which are essentially inspired by man, and in the position of

‘humility’ […] The forms that expand and connect with the outdoor, the garden,

large windows, that air of ‘non-severity’, is the first step for abolishing the

barriers […] Let us start with schools, and above all let us start with architecture.

(Bo Bardi 1951, as cited in Lina Bo Bardi, 1994, p. 67)

The Glass House, the first building Bo Bardi built, is listed as a historical site by

local authorities in 1987, and is also the first modern house constructed in the remnants of

the Brazilian rain forests and relics of archaic agricultural peripheral. When it is built in

1951, it is named by the people of Real Park who are inspired by its crystalline mass

shining in the neighborhood. The Glass House remains the Bardis’ private residence until

the architect’s death, and in 1995 it is donated to house the Lina Bo and P. M. Bardi

Institute (The Instituto Quadrante is founded in 1990 by the Bardis; it is named as the

Instituto Lina Bo e P. M. Bardi after the architect’s death to pay homage to her memory)

by Maria Bardi. Reserving the archive since 1990, it houses part of the Bardis private art

collection, and serves as a research foundation to preserve and spread Bardis’ cultural

legacy and work. It is still a meeting place for artists today, and a place for pragmatic

activities by national and international exhibitions, lectures and publications as it is meant

for by Bardis (Lepik, 2014, p.18; Lina Bo Bardi, 1994, p. 81; Wisnik, 2014, p. 38; Lima,

2013, p. 55; Instituto Lina Bo e P. M. Bardi, n.d.).

In addition to being the Bo Bardi’s first built work, the Glass House appears as “a

synthesis of all the thinking she had done since Italy” (Oliveira, 2000; 2006, p. 69). The

55
simple form of the private back of the house (Figure 4.30) is “redolent of traditional

Portuguese colonial houses in Brazil” (Bergdoll & Lima, 2013, p. viii) and also

characterizes the Italian countryside houses; it is the country where she grew up, trained,

and rooted respectable artistic and intellectual experiences from. Bo Bardi’s drawing

upon simple forms and actual situations from local contexts reveals the dictum of her

architecture, and it is contextually notable in recognition of the Biophilic Design which

appraises the primitive and local architecture in regard to using local natural materials

and their connected building typologies with nature. It is also explained in more depth in

her article Architettura e natura (1943) published in Domus. She pursues a kind of

architecture that “instilled in architecture the equation climate, environment, soil, life –an

equation that has flourished, with wonderful primitivism, in the most spontaneous of

architectural forms: rural architecture” (as cited in Bader, 2014, pp. 92-94). Oliveira

(2006) analytically sums up the diacritic style of the Glass House in an apprehensible

abstract:

There are two parts to the Glass House: the front block is crystalline, airborne,

supported on pilotis, with clear references to the canons of modern architecture;

the rear block is walled, embedded in the ground and built in the language of, and

with materials from, traditional vernacular construction. (p. 67)

In search of her own way, Bo Bardi has always aimed to serve the public with her

works and ideologies. Her works mediated toward modern architecture, as it seems by the

Glass House’s front façade, however deviated from international modernism’s rigid form

and material imposition. Experimentation with vernacular and surface design in her early

works by using stones and plants provides an intimate association between nature and

56
architecture to her own interpretation. This idiosyncratic style of the architect also

manifests empathy for the cultural context, examining deeper creative sources of folk art

including the usage of unprocessed and rough materials parallel to the notion of local

building tradition. Vera Simone Bader (2014) construes the relationship of nature and

vernacular in Bo Bardi’s perspective: “The link between the two stems from her concept

of origin, since she viewed nature as the source of being and the vernacular as the starting

point for the design of one’s living environment” (pp.87- 89). For the architect, the potent

creative characteristics resonate from the field conditions and what exists at a place,

which certainly reveal and demonstrate the ‘experiences’ of Biophilic features. The

surrounding context, landscape, human needs and proportions would be the origins for a

typology and a building form developed around these characteristics:

Modern architecture has led to that complex organism that is the house up to the

proper relationship between technique/ aesthetics/ function and has established an

intimate link with the earth, life and man’s labours. Mountains, forests, rivers,

rocks, meadows and fields are the factors that determine house form; soil, climate

and winds then determine its position, the surrounding ground provides the

materials for its construction; the house is born, then, profoundly linked to the

earth, its proportions are dictated by a constant – the human measure – and

flowing uninterruptedly and in deep harmony through there is its life. (Bo Bardi,

1943; as cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 109)

Parallel to this conception, Bo Bardi coins the term “arquitetura pobre” for the

literature defining the association of architecture with nature, and the “intent to develop a

collectively relevant aesthetics of simplification” (Lima, 2013, p. 156). Having its source

57
from her experiences trace back to Italy in the 1930’s, this thought becomes her

distinctive exposition “when Rationalists had already discovered ‘architettura rurale’ as a

possible source of inspiration for a national style […] The architect’s response to the

situation in Brazil was her personal interpretation and further development of the

vernacular…” (Lepik, 2014, p. 23) Bo Bardi’s understanding of Rationalism – the

movement distinctly values the regional building techniques and forms as expositions of

the national identity – stands on more of an anthropological and Humanistic interest

mainly, and it regards people in essence, rather than political ideas, and links the ethical

concerns behind of all (Bader, 2014, p. 94). This could be a great representation of the

Biophilic Design ‘attribute’, the cultural and ecological attachment to place, which

inclines people to preserve and sustain the built and natural environments.

Distinctively, the perspective Bo Bardi and Wright look to regarding the myth of

nature is not an idealist one in comparison with the Romantics’. “For the two architects it

has to do with a real and tangible organizing connected to human experience, and is very

far from the idealism of form” (Oliveira, 2006, p. 94). In Bo Bardi’s architecture, it also

presents a “declaration of reaction, or a polemic at least”; a provocative reaction against

the rise of a consumer society, decreasing value of local, and its creative and

transformative production in parallel (Oliveira, 2006, p. 273). Thus, communicating the

resilient caliber of nature adaptable to dynamic settings, Bo Bardi looks for “endless

shapes, multiplied, unfinished, unlimited, constantly moving, like natural forms”

(Oliveira, 2006, p. 95) that she specifies explicitly in her comparative analyze of natural

and unnatural architecture in a conference:

58
 […] organic architecture is close to nature, aims to imitate it, endeavors to

surrender without resistance and without wanting to dominate it, accept it and

love it, get from it a regard for primary rustic materials. Above all, it does not

want to forget nature and wishes to remember its laws all the time, in the

dynamism of its forms, in the unfinished, in the endlessness of the shapes. Hence

Frank Lloyd Wright, who accepts almost no limits on his work and prolongs

indefinitely what was defined as organic space (Bardi, 1958; as cited in Oliveira,

2006, p. 95).

As a contrast, Lina discussed in the same lecture the Errázuriz House in Chile,

designed by Le Corbusier in 1930, which she gave as a model of “unnatural

architecture,” and “architecture that ‘frames’ nature without being part of it. An

architecture delicately resting on nature like […] an object on a table, an

architecture that ‘looks at’ nature’ but does not have confidence in it and could be

located here or there. (Oliveira, 2006, p. 96)

When these two models Bo Bardi brings up analytically are taken into

consideration, the Glass House could be interpreted as a synthesis, simultaneously

crossbred of both concepts. Oliveira (2006) explains further: “indeed Lina saw the two

models as neither mutually exclusive nor opposed” (p. 96). Bo Bardi adds to her

pondering that the “Organic architecture fascinates us, but non-organic architecture

prophesies a future when people will passionately love nature, trees, beautiful stones,

mountains and vast green plains – these will come into their houses unopposed” (Bardi,

1958; as cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 97).

59
 The Glass House could be explained as such “a moment in which popular

architecture establishe[d] an agreement with contemporary architecture” (as cited in

Lima, 2013, p. 60) as Bo Bardi writes in Habitat 1953. She brings a bold creative

adaptation to Modernist ideas. The basic scheme of the Glass House suggests the

lightness and weightlessness different than its contemporaries –Farnsworth House (1945-

51) by Mies van der Rohe and Glass House (1949) by Philip Johnson. Adjusted to sloped

topography, the building entry (Figure 4.31) opens up to the lifted main floor at center of

the house and connects to the ground with a flight of steps (Weintraub, & Hess, 2010).

The architectural theme of the house is analogous to the form of a tree, lifted

transparently ‘to disappear in the forest’. The glass horizontal volume divided only by

fine profiles and lifted on delicate steel columns compromises with the surrounding

Atlantic Forest. Bo Bardi also proposes the importance of techniques and formal

inspirations derive from nature, which could be referred to as the ‘attribute’ of

biomimicry for the indirect experience of nature in the built environment:

So what do we understand organic, natural architecture to be? We understand it is

not to be limited a priori, but an open architecture which accepts nature,

conforms, seeks to mimic it like a living organism, an architecture that manages

to assume almost mimetic forms at times, like a lizard on sunbaked rocks. (Bardi,

1958; as cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 127)

The ‘route architecture’, being an important element for Bo Bardi, creates place

which expands time, sensations and perceptions, and this could also be seen at the Glass

House (Oliveira, 2006, p. 222). It begins by framing the view of the house on top of the

60
hill from the approach, and the steep driveway taken to reach this countryside house –

this kind of design to ‘frame the views’ is also seen at the Taliesin West. The

photographic views are continually put into visitors’ vision in frames on the route leading

up to the inside of the house. The final picture in the frame is taken by the house itself.

This time the house shoots the view by looking at the forest which fitted into its glass

frame (Figure 4.32). The promenade architecturale of the house guides visitors in such a

route that allows discovery and becomes a decisive element of the Glass House,

considering the effort to provide uninterrupted views towards the natural surroundings.

Following the arrival to the house from the carport in the ‘covered garden’, the

axis of the entrance lines up with the tree in the central atrium and leads visitors up into

the house with an ascending route – the stair flights underneath the glass lounge. Above

the functional aspects of these transitional spaces, Bo Bardi appraises tree and staircases’

atmospheric features, which guide the project structure and orientation while creating life

in architecture (Figure 4.33). After a seven step stair flight facing towards the scenery, a

landing invites visitors to pause and look around as a previous marker announcing the

ambiance in the house. “Being ‘there’ should be the same as being ‘over there’ in the

lounge, a terrace facing nature and without barriers, one where people should feel as if

they are in the open air” writes Bo Bardi (“Entre”, 1953, p.8-13, as cited in Oliveira,

2006, p. 49). In this respect, the structural elements were reduced to a minimum in the

design of this light and transparent staircase which consists of an initial shorter flight, a

landing, and in the sequel a longer flight. Painted in light bluish grey – the same color as

the slender vertical elements – the delicate metal structure of this entirely in situ built

61
staircase supports polished slabs of grey granite treads. The experimental architecture at

the construction site, which is similar to the Wright’s method of direct intervention with

the existing materials, has been a prominent technique for Bo Bardi in regard to creations

from conditions at the construction.

The continuous conjunction between the meandering collateral stone paths and

irregular steps of the terraced garden create a fluid connection between the house and site

(Figure 4.34). This continuous flow proceeds through the planted and curved retaining

walls, on which the river stones are scattered, imbedded, and sometimes stream-like

grouped by the cement /sand mortar coat, structuring ‘the dynamic and living strength’ of

the house (Oliveira, 2006, pp. 85, 172). The geometric form of the house and the natural

irregularity of the landscape also reiterate the contrast between the building and the site.

The house harbors columns in four modules of 5 meters, which defines the

modular layout of the lower floor plan. Bo Bardi sets the two end columns back from the

outer edge of the skin by a few centimeters. By doing so, the order of the steel columns

provides an uninterrupted continuum of the glass façade at three sides of the lounge, and

also appropriates the size for a car port. Although, at the initial phase Bo Bardi envisages

the pilotis as wooden logs resting on a concrete base with the intent to work on natural

materials (Oliveira, 2006, p. 58), the final structure of ten steel columns becomes the

feeling of “très elegante,” as appraised by the architect Max Bill. The structural

calculation of the constructions is conducted by the engineer Tullio Stucchi by reducing

the building’s environmental impacts to the land. The front part of the house is elevated

on Mannesmann simple pipe columns, sizing 17 centimeter (6 ½ in.) in diameter, and

62
painted the bluish tone of light grey to blend with the surrounding vegetation (Lina Bo

Bardi, 1994, p. 81).

Considering Bo Bardi’s observations on Japanese progress and culture that she

thinks “is deeply connected to respect for nature” (Bo Bardi, n.d. personal notes in

Ferrraz, 1993, p. 209, as cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 156), it could be thought the typology

of the Glass House might be analogous with some great tea houses in Japanese

architecture. Displaying some similar features with the Glass House in terms of design

and landing on terrain, these tea houses straddles land and lake on wooden pilotis; they

are designed for people to observe, and appreciate surroundings by vantage points. The

influences from Japanese architecture are also seen at Wright’s works considering that he

lived in Tokyo from 1916 to 1922 (Nute, 1993; as cited in Unwin, 2015 p. 132). When

the ideological cohesion between Wright and Bo Bardi is discussed in detail, their

influences from the Japanese architecture and culture cannot be ignored. Even though the

Biophilic Design proposes the ‘attribute’ cultural and ecological attachment to place to

promote maintenance and sustainability of local values, it could be helpful for architects

to observe the techniques and philosophies of other cultures to reach a prosperous

knowledge ready to be interpreted in different situations appropriately as Wright and Bo

Bardi do. Simon Unwin (2015) expresses these Japanese influences when analyzing the

approach of Wright to nature, which also could be a clue for interpreting the rectangular

continuous glazed façades of the Glass House and its landing on top of a vista of the

green hill Morumbi:

63
 This integration with nature is born of an attitude which Wright probably acquired

while in Japan [...] It was in Japan that Wright saw subtle interplay between the

regularity of human constructions and the irregularity of natural forms in the

landscape [...] Traditionally Japanese architects and garden designers were

interested in creating pleasing compositions that could be viewed either through

the rectangular openings of buildings or from particular viewpoints. (Unwin,

2015, pp. 124-134)

Beyond the “usual precautions”, Bo Bardi aspires to free the Glass House to

nature (Bo Bardi, 1953) in pursuit of an intense and healthy direct experience of nature.

In the early 1940’s Bo Bardi and Carlo Pagani write a number of articles for the design

and architecture magazine Domus (1940; 1943) propounding the aesthetic and efficient

techniques to connect with nature. They claim that “Architecture must be the key to the

landscape, merge with the landscape, and become the landscape itself” (Bo Bardi, &

Pagani, 1940, p.30; as cited in Bader, 2014, p. 92). Implementing this perspective, Bo

Bardi integrates the Atlantic Forest vegetation in the elevated atrium of the Glass House.

The pursued ideal of the Glass House is clearly stated by Bo Bardi (1953): “neither

decorative nor compositional effects were sought, since the aim is to come extremely

close to nature using all available means – the most straightforward methods that

interfere least with nature” (as cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 45). In the article (1944) “Case

sui trampoli” (meaning ‘Houses on wooden piles’) juxtaposing the Villa Savoye and an

airship, Bo Bardi and Pagani praise the “airborne architecture” as a way of liberating

houses. This conjures up the images of houses that appear to ‘travel’ on land or even on

water. In this sense, the Stilt house typology of the Glass House rising on the piles over

64
the slope of a hill, and its airborne architecture intend to leave nature truly intact, while

preserving intimate atmosphere between the nature and the building (Figure 4.35). To

liberate the architectural space, Bo Bardi uses the method of lifting airborne volume with

pillars and draws upon the ethereality of the ‘box’ exposing the transparency of glass as a

medium to approach nature; this could be considered as an alternative approach to the

‘Destruction of the Box’ by Wright. Instead of ‘transforming’ anything Bo Bardi suggests

‘listening’ to be able to see existing matter and its teachings (Oliveira, 2006, p. 44-45),

which is also quite similar to Wright’s design approach in Taliesin West.

In the same article, looking at Bo Bardi’s quotes from Le Corbusier on the “non-

arbitrary construction” of Villa Savoye, it is possible to see his intellectual reflections in

the Glass House as well; “an object placed in the middle of the landscape…arrival of the

car under the pilotis …beautiful view and surroundings…will affect the landscape as

little as possible, without disturbing it” (as cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 58). The methods

that Bo Bardi uses to free architecture of the Glass House construct ‘emotional

relationships’ referring to the Le Corbusier’s poetics, which regard architecture as a

“phenomenon of emotions” (Corbusier, 1923).

This house represents an attempt to achieve a communion between nature and the

natural order of things. By raising minimum defenses against the natural

elements, it tries to respect this natural order, with clarity, and never as a

hermetically sealed box that flees from the storms and the rain, shies away from

the world of men – the kind of box which, on the rare occasions it approaches

nature, does so only in a decorative or compositional, and therefore ‘external’

sense. (Bo Bardi, 1953)

65
 The thought of natural order in ‘chaotic’ surroundings is not meant to overcome

the chaos for Bo Bardi; in contrast the architect reveals the existing conditions of

environment overtly. The architectural order (i.e. modular columns of the building)

placed in chaos (i.e. irregular and changing lush forest vegetation around the building)

puts forward the ‘attribute’ of Biophilic Design: the organized complexity in the project.

This kind of an experience of space and place is presented by a satisfying setting

balanced in coherence within a complex environment that people always covet in

psychological perception for Biophilic responses.

For a harmonious orientation of the building to the existing nature, Bo Bardi

develops a conception applied in her diacritic methods, which are observed in multiple

cases in the project. Bo Bardi extrapolates limits of her architecture to the various

disciplines such as philosophy, art, literature, psychoanalysis and anthropology to reach

the freedom of endless possibilities in the face of divergent situations (Oliveira, 2006, p.

15). She questions ‘the idea of reason’, which is the beginning of the ancient philosophy,

simultaneously “looking for balance in resolving opposites, found in all cultures usually

called primitive, where material, spiritual and psychological life are part of the

harmonious system” (Oliveira, 2006, p. 112). In accordance, Bo Bardi recommends that

“…studious reflection on the natural order of things will, without a doubt, favor

permanent contact with this determinant reason of our beings” while she points out the

current isolation of houses from nature and its consequential problems for the day and

future (Bo Bardi, 1957; as translated in Veikos, 2014, p. 67).

66
 In the broadest sense, numerous teleological interpretations could be constructed

by looking at the semantic reflections within the symbolic and iconographic figurations in

her architecture. To be able to understand the purposefulness of her ideas within the

meaningful architectural forms, it is important to read narratives that come from a

‘building’s own rhetoric’; and to use the auxiliary materials such as semiological

symbols, metaphors and dialectics; dialectics are not only a method of discourse but also

an interpretive philosophical method in ancient Greek, aspiring to establish the truth – by

a synthesis – resultant of reasoned arguments from different points of view on a matter.

‘Nature and the natural order of things’, which is often referred by Bo Bardi,

could be understood better by contemplating the meaning of the ‘order’ in history of

architectural language. Bo Bardi embraces and reviews the history as an ‘integrated’

method to diagnose the useful and adaptable for new situations rather than a search of

stylistic forms (Oliveira, 2006, p. 110, 354). Influential Roman architect Vitruvius

ponders on the ‘orders’ in his treatise De Architectura.

In it there is a mixture of description of buildings of the past, [...] and prescription

which lays down the appropriate forms for new buildings. A key form is that of

the ‘orders’, the system of columns, capitals and associated mouldings, of which

Vitruvius knew three: Doric, Ionic and Corinthian. (“Treatises: Vitruvius is Alive

and Well”, p. 19)

In this respect, it could be interpreted that the thought of framing juxtaposed

‘order’ and ‘chaos’ might be an establishment of a discernable building trophy of ancient

67
times’ architecture standing “as the Acropolis on the hill.” (Lima, 2013, p. 79)

Accordingly, if there is a metaphor, it could also be read as resisting the time. Utilizing

this method adds tradition which “is as current as it is ancient” (“Treatises: Vitruvius is

Alive and Well”, p. 21), “but that this presence of the past is adamantly not nostalgic”

(Bergdoll & Lima, 2013, p. ix). Unwin (2015) illustrates this possible thought by Bo

Bardi on the order of the columns more perceptibly:

The steel framework of the glass box is however not regular. The outer bays are

narrower than the middle; this is to allow the steel columns to be set inside the

glass walls whilst keeping the glazing panels a regular size. The problem faced

(and solved in this way) by Bardi is reminiscent of that of the architects of ancient

Greek Doric temples such as the Parthenon where the spaces between the outer

columns are narrowed to allow the triglyphs in the entablature above to be

regularly spaced. (p. 231)

In addition to the idea of liberating spaces in consideration of tradition, culture

and history, Bo Bardi approaches the notion of ‘time’ in a sense which also liberates the

past by contacting with “humankind’s ancient vital, primary, and non-crystallized

essence” (Bo Bardi, 1958). It is notable that the Hypothesis of Biophilia also connects to

this ancient vital at its core. This kind of an approach simultaneously could refer to the

anthropological claims of the Biophilia Hypothesis on survival experiences of humankind

in nature, and its possible evolutionary inheritance of innate tendencies; as Bo Bardi

states “we are its results”:

68
 From the intimate space of the house, the family nucleus, to the omnipresent

space of nature, the problem of architecture –an activity of man in the contiguous

space defined by earth and undefined by air– appears to us full of facts and

anxious doubts; of assurances because of what has already been achieved; and,

simultaneously, questions and fears. History is implicit in these thoughts; history,

whose living presence is synthesized in our actions precisely because we are its

result… (Bo Bardi, 1957; as translated in Veikos, 2014, p. 70)

The created perception in architecture appeals to the senses and constructs an

interaction between man and architecture. In the course of time these relations,

interactions, and ways of living produce experiences which appear as the end results. The

most non-physical instance of these end results could be called ‘mnemonics’ (this also

could be called the sixth sense in architectural spaces) or could be seen as ‘architectural

phenomenology’ (it researches the experience of built space) which emphasizes the

objective reality of an object, matter or process based upon its experiential foundation.

On the other side, for the most physical instance of these end results could be seen in the

context of architecture by the traces of time on the built environment which is a Biophilic

Design ‘attribute’; age, change and the patina of time.

In this sense, Bo Bardi rebuts the functionalist tradition’s superficial conduct in

constant transformation, which is incapable of congregate experiences. She claims that

“To function, architecture must have life.” (Bo Bardi, 1987, as cited in Oliveira, 2006, p.

357) This is interpreted as the second dimension of time in Bo Bardi’s work which rouses

the ‘perception and movement of man in space’. Revival of the past and memory in the

69
body of her architecture could be analytically correlated to Bo Bardi’s (1958) explanation

of the bond between man and architecture:

But until people enter the building, climb the steps and take possession of the

space in a ‘human adventure’ that develops in time, the architecture does not

exist; it is an inhumane cold scheme. Man creates movement with his feelings. An

architecture is created, ‘invented again’, by each person who walks into it, crosses

through the space, climbs the stairs, leans on a balustrade, looks up to see, open or

close a door, or to sit and stand up. That individual has intimate contact and

simultaneously creates ‘forms’ in space, expresses feelings… (as cited in Oliveira,

2006, p. 358)

In the Glass House Bo Bardi (1953) also claims a polemical intent, “like the one

that, in any case, all responsible architects should include in all their buildings” she says

(as cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 77). In the conception of metaphorical architecture, forms

gain new meaning[s]. Here, the architect addresses the harmony and the contrast

synchronously. The diacritic characteristic of Bo Bardi’s architecture reinvents

conventional teachings and molded doctrines at the Glass House with her

methodologically developed dialogues as is seen through the appositions of the opposites.

Sometimes they appear as dialectics of the opposite poles, but most often they are a

balance of a dichotomy to ‘get it right’, and they gravitate toward the two different styles,

typologies, approaches, and materials: open and closed, light and shade, glass and wall,

earth and air, “natural and artificial (sometimes industrial), feminine and masculine,

public and private, ancient and modern, popular and scholarly, curvaceous and

70
rectilinear, ordered and casual (sometimes chaos), airborne and grounded, clear and

opaque, real and imaginary” (Oliveira, 2006, p. 11), “interior and exterior, form and

content, art and technique, architecture and engineering, theory and practice, body and

spirit” (Oliveira, 2006, p. 113). They all coincide through the project from the site context

of the building to the designed objects in the interiors. They all are balanced in constant

tension through diversions and conversions in perception of the single volume. It is

possible to interpret these poles in projective surfaces, as it is argued by Oliveira (2006,

p. 77); “they are linked, as if wanting to show that there should be no contradiction

between.”

From a psychoanalytic point of view, Bo Bardi’s architectural expressions and

their sensory aspects in the Glass House could be linked to M.D. Milton H. Erickson's

theory and ideas (theory of “Utilization”) in the abstract, which similarly communicate

by seeding ideas mostly in physical and psychological metaphoric forms and symbols for

a therapeutic purpose. These methods also apply to a number of hypnotic suggestions in

the operation of Erickson’s (1979) therapy which correlates with Bo Bardi’s design

method: apposition of opposites, utilization of shock, surprise, creative moments and so

on. It is also known that Bo Bardi believes “…the protective and curative character of

[…] architectural elements. ‘Intensive therapy,’ in Lina’s words. The vegetation, gardens

and leaves are directly related to health –to life, in other words.” (Bo Bardi, 1988, p. 37;

as cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 226) Erickson argues that the unconscious mind is a source

of healing and strength. Thus, these methods that they use, believed to aid the conscious

mind to become aware of the power within a person, and effectively produce change in

the way of behaving and interacting, which underlies of Bo Bardi’s ideology also.

71
 When looking from another ontological perspective, a synergic entity operates the

‘whole’ of the Glass House, which ‘is greater than the sum of its parts’ as phrased by the

philosopher Aristotle. It is such a system where in everything works together, just like the

‘architecture’ that is defined by Bo Bardi (1957, p. 13) as an “organism apt for life”. “Air,

light, nature and works of arts”: Bo Bardi calls these elements the “subtle substances” of

architecture; working with materials used in the building, they construct the living spirit

of the system. In this whole, Bo Bardi “uses the word ‘substance’ to mean: something

necessary for material permanence; something necessary for life; something that forms

the basis; and something which has the property of strength, vigor and resistance.” (Bo

Bardi, & Pagani, 1944; as cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 34) An epitome of orchestral playing

in the Glass House is seen in a great finesse. It resonates from juxtaposition of different

styles, origins and periods, as well as the elaboration of details, colors, textures, objects,

materials, furniture and the space. Over and above the hermeneutical depth of the ideas,

material use, and functions, the sensorial perceptions are stimulated to ‘psychological

state of mind’ in this set of the Glass House. The house could be considered as a

document to be read, and Bo Bardi explains more on construction of the sense of

inhabiting:

Certainly, it is rare that an artist becomes so enthusiastic about a material that it

serves for every purpose; but good painters have just a few basic and pure colours

on their palettes, and they use these to compose the whole range of light and

shade. In the same way, a good architect uses a few basic new and old materials,

but ones that are also honest and have rich and full voices that can sing the song

the house composed in order to speak to our senses. Here they are, the notes on
72
 your keyboard: the brick, stone and plaster, old and humble components of our

walls, able to receive frescos and so many finishes and combinations. Here is the

wood, the linoleum and the rubber for our floors, and the marble and ceramics.

When we make furniture, we use mainly wood, and we mix in hides, leather and

mirrors; lastly (for modern architecture) metal and glass. All this is topped off

with other subtle substances that contribute to the whole, and these are air, light,

nature and works of art. There are seemingly few combinations that may be made

with these notes and all in all the potential solutions are countless. Thus, in the

hands of a Le Corbusier even traditional materials, those of which every

expressive possibility has apparently been explored years ago, find a new accent,

an unexpected importance as abstract decoration. (Bo Bardi, & Pagani, 1944; as

cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 78)

Inspired by the notion of “architectural emotion” (Corbusier, 1923), Bo Bardi

promotes ‘creating the right state of mind’ in the architectural ‘atmosphere’, which

requires utilizing all possible resources. Grounding this approach, she underlies the

importance of ‘exact’ design of the entrance to a house. In this regard, she emphasizes the

right choice of floor treatment in her argument: The largest portion of a house is

experienced mostly by the sense of sight. As for the entrance floor, it is “inevitably

destined to interact with our sense of touch” and it “should not be formless, subsequently

needing to be covered with carpet” (Bo Bardi, & Pagani, 1944; as cited in Oliveira, 2006,

p. 57). This explains the choice of ethereal blue mosaics used in the entrance and lounge

of the Glass House which intensifies the feeling of the building being airborne, invokes

continuum of horizon and reflects the color of sky.

73
 Another interpretation of this perspective is made by Maria Bardi, who “defines

glass as the imitator of the heavens, but also of the waters.” (1943, as cited in Oliveira

et.al. 2006, p. 65) In addition to the unmistakable airborne reflections found at the house,

he articulates the aquatic feeling at the house created by the glass material at a further

level. “Lina considered the airborne and the aquatic with ambiguity, and the best

expression of this is the photograph in which she held a small sailing boat over her head”

says Oliveira (2006, p. 66) in her book. All these symbolics full of artistry help to

conceive the created ‘natural’ ‘atmosphere’, which embodies stimulus to the physical

environment. The same blue mosaic found in the lounge also repeats in the bathroom

surfaces, which strengthens the ‘aquatic’ feeling created by the fluidal texture of the wet

surfaces. From this point of view, by looking at the choice of materials and colors, it

could be speculated that Bo Bardi wants to convey the feelings evoked by nature through

designed mediums and textures, which intensifies the natural integrity of the house.

Either way her iconographic expressions break the monotony of plain surfaces by either

continuous blue sky horizon at the lounge floor or fluidal textures enhancing the feeling

of water in the bathroom.

Oliveira calls the Glass House “an air house, an aquarium house” referring to the

image presented by the house itself in a state of flux: “a water chamber, light box,

immersion, floating” (Oliveira, 2006, p. 340). She mentions these aquatic features

further, referring Bo Bardi’s earlier article “L’acquario in casa” (Bo Bardi, & Pagani,

1941). Various recommendations on designing aquariums are found in this article,

including an identical sketch to the basin built in front of the Glass House, filled by

74
water, plants and fishes and covered with sand, pebbles, and shells in the bottom. Oliveira

attributes this to Bo Bardi’s effort “to inspire our memories and our past” by reuniting the

‘lost’ and ‘found’ elements collected in the bottom of basin or imbedded in the garden

walls and on the entrance driveway of the house, such as plants, pebbles and clustered tile

shards. These elements kept in the background as nature, silence, and emptiness are

considered by Bo Bardi as recycling techniques for the new functions in ecological and

ethical attitudes. Based on the specific technique Bo Bardi uses, Oliveira also makes a

reference to Sigmund Freud’s assertion that “forgotten memories are not lost” (Oliveira

in “Lina Bo Bardi 100”, 2014, pp. 160, 161).

An illustration of Bo Bardi’s statement “using all available means” (1953), nature

is welcomed to the house also by water spouts. By the one on the top of house, rainwater

is channeled to the side façades of the house to fall into the oval basin from

approximately ten meters high (Oliveira, 2006, pp. 65, 66). All these elements inspired by

nature help to hide or soften the contradictive character of the house (Oliveira, 2006,

p.163). These red painted water elements are associated with fertility by their refreshing

characters, which also can be analogous to blood “that circulates, nurtures and brings life

to the human body, this red blood which always accumulates in the water-spouts and

other elements of movement in Lina’s buildings, which appear as abundant reserves for

life” (Oliveira, 2006, p. 233).

In Lina Bo Bardi’s buildings various elements are repeated so often and so

regularly that we are bound to be surprised. The intensity and strangeness of these

elements gives them a certain symbolism, difficult to analyze in terms of their

75
 function alone. Water-spouts are among the most expressive elements in Lina’s

buildings and she always gave them special treatment. This could be expressed in

a water-spout’s form, color or texture, or merely by its size. She drew them even

in her initial studies for buildings, and they were usually shown red. Normally

they were active, drawn with water gushing out as if they were real waterfalls.

Lina persisted with the waterfall image for fountains, watercourses, showers and

open-air drinking fountains, not just for water-spouts. […] The water that pours

from these water-spouts is collected in basins dug into the ground. […] Lina

connects water with life. It’s worth pointing out that Lina’s basins are almost

always stocked with plants and fish; biotypes. (Oliveira, 2006, p. 161)

The Glass House has been “like a stage for a display of natural phenomena”

(Miotto & Nicolini, 1998, p. 18; as cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 97), yet also been an

observatory for the architect (Figure 4.36). The simply defined transparent light void of

the lounge on the slim metal columns becomes such “a platform between sky and

vegetation” (“Entre”, 1953, pp. 8, 13, as cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 45). Bo Bardi

characterizes “a terrace facing nature and without barriers, one where people should feel

as if they are in the open air” in the house (“Entre”, 1953, p. 8, 13, as cited in Oliveira

2006, p. 49). The ‘glass walls’ sitting on the sliding frames, create a direct transition of

inside and outside for a ‘properly lit and ventilated architecture’. The architecture floats

with light and shadows while protecting against wind and rain. Truly impressed by the

‘atmospheric appearance’ of the house, Gio Ponti (1953) writes that:

76
 [The house] is a space and not a volume; or it is a transparent volume. It is a

house immersed in the air, periscopic. Already, here are some of its poetic values.

The day-time part soars into empty space, it is the eye of the house, all light, air,

sun, green, space, atmosphere –it is a balcony, an observation post. The night-

time part is the opposite, as it should be, walled in, secret. (as cited in Oliveira,

2006, p. 78)

The two photographs showing the views from inside and outside of the house

published in Habitat in 1953, reveal the overt connection between the building and nature

schemed by the architect as are explained and summarized in the captions. The picture

taken from outside is captioned as: “the lounge is completely surrounded by glass, and is

protected by vinyl curtains that protect us from the heat of solar rays”, while the other

one taken from interior is explained as it is which “allows a complete view of the

woodland and the city” (Oliveira, 2006, p. 41). Bo Bardi narrates what she observes from

her window which could be clearly connected to the ‘attributes’ of Biophilic Design in

the project; the cultural and ecological attachment to place; the prospect and refuge:

Behind the old “Farm House”, all blue and white, where one could still see the

slave’s manacles and chains, the great cauldrons, copper basins and other utensils,

and behind the pink slave’s quarters and the great fig trees, there was a small lake,

surrounded by Araucaria (Parana Pine) trees, with an “Atlantic Rain Forest” in

the background, full of orchids and rare plants. A great silence and many popular

legends used to surround the “Casa Grande” farm and the forest: legends about

Indians, (stone utensils had been found in the surrounds), about slaves and about

77
 Jesuits, especially in the neighborhood of Vila Tramontano, where, in the little

chapel dedicated to Saint Sebastian, the people of Real Park would gather for the

popular auction fairs held every first Sunday of the month. (as cited in Lina Bo

Bardi, 1994, p. 78)

Bo Bardi’s consideration of glass material as a ‘dominant element’ in the house

identifies nature within architecture. It works as a convergent element of the spatial

organization, where organic and inorganic, interior and exterior meet. Oliveira (2006)

interprets the dominance of glass material, attributing it to Bo Bardi’s fascination with Le

Corbusier’s horizontal windows and the idea of “outside is always inside”:

The exterior exists only when captured, understood, considered. The landscape

exists only in our brains, within a rational and sensory intention, in other words.

So the exterior exists only inside, and when we enter an interior by Lina or Le

Corbusier we do not feel closed in; quite the opposite, we understand the

functioning of what surrounds us. The whole ritual of access into the Glass House

is nothing more than presentation of the surroundings, and when you enter you

have the impression of being outside because the countryside has been captured.

(p. 62)

Rejecting any interruption to the liberty envisioned in the glazed lounge, floor to

ceiling light beige “Plavonil” (as cited in Veikos, 2014, p. 19) curtains are the only

elements providing privacy and protection from the Brazilian sun. Bo Bardi avoids use of

the 1950’s popular brises soleil as a fixed element which could cut the uninterrupted

78
visual and aerial transition between interior and exterior. The curtains, which correspond

to transparency and flexibility in the lounge, had been planned since sketching phase of

the Glass House, including the ones dividing spaces at dining room and fireside area.

Using these kind of flexible and soft separators as transition elements, which are operable

according to casual simultaneous needs in the house, can also be seen at Wright’s

Taliesin West as well; the white canvasses had been chosen at appropriate spaces instead

of doors. Bo Bardi favors these light and flexible curtains, and she primarily uses them to

“insulate and absorb the sun’s rays” (as cited in Veikos, 2014, p. 19), while screening the

oriental compositions created by the surrounding tree branches and shadows, which cast

the light identical to the panels used in Japanese designs (Oliveira, 2006, pp. 41, 65).

Along with the concerns to identify nature within the built environment through

the design process –mostly by the properties of glass– thermal comfort has been another

imperative for Bo Bardi. Thus, appropriately to the warm climate conditions of Brazil,

the architect provides thermal insulation at the building by using fiberglass in the

sandwich panels of the façade, roof, and also for the independent green roof above the

kitchen. To minimize heat gain from the direct sun, she also orients the house towards the

south-east direction, and this makes it possible to frame the panoramic view of São Paulo

city to the lounge of the house (Oliveira, 2006, p. 65).

[…] In this latitude – south of the equator – means that it faces away from the sun

at noon, when it is at its strongest. The side glass walls are however hit by

morning and evening sun; the surrounding trees help provide shade but the glass

walls are also provided with light curtains. The glass walls around the central

79
 square ‘courtyard’ may be opened too, for cross ventilation. (Unwin, 2015, p.

225)

Over time, the Glass House has had a different appearance shielded by the

growing landscape. Today, without the need for any protection, the Sun shimmers

through the forest’s canopy, which is superior to any material. It provides an intimate

connection merging with the elevated open volume of house. Resulting from the merge

with nature as an epitome of symbiosis, Bo Bardi portrays a zest for being part of this

splendid nature with her sketches and verbal depictions (Oliveira, 2006, p. 71). All these

thoughts applied to the Glass House and lives around the project site are clear indicators

of the Biophilic Design variables; they incorporate all the ‘attributes’ of direct experience

of nature within it.

I was impressed by that landscape. It was an impressive Brazilian forest reserve,

full of wild bugs, possums, armadillos, deer and guinea pigs. On other occasions I

returned to the area to see flycatchers, doves, cuckoos, thrushes and seriemas. At

night I heard nighthawks, owl and other birds. (Bo Bardi, 1987; as cited in

Oliveira, 2006, p. 73)

The front block of building is the communal part of the house and visible from

outside, such that Bo Bardi refers to it in many sources as an ‘Open house’ to receive

people. Reflecting on the social aspect of it, Bo Bardi democratizes the space in a free

platform open to nature which could be referring to both the ideology of Frank Lloyd

Wright and the technique of Le Corbusier –the Domino principle developed in 1914.

80
With these referrals it becomes possible to free the design of façade and floor plan for Bo

Bardi (Lina Bo Bardi 100: Brazil's alternative path to modernism, 2014, pp. 195,196). It

could be understood better by Oliveira’s (2006) interpretation of such design in this part

of the house:

Life is lived by day, in action, so there is a generous glazed living area with the

sun’s rays streaming in –a meeting place, collective, plural. Lina’s declared

intention to build a house that would be a large atelier for artists explains its

collective aspect (p. 67).

The core structure of the high-ceilinged building is enclosed by a flat, inclined

gable roof, and glazed façade’s floor to ceiling sliding doors. The free plan of the main

floor develops around a tree, which is enclosed by the glass atrium (Figure 4.37) called “a

kind of suspended courtyard” by Bo Bardi (1953). A pierced volume of architecture

respectful to trees has been one of the favorite themes for Bo Bardi and Wright, which

“resonates in a way that causes oddity and surprise” (Oliveira, 2006, p. 45) in the

architectural atmosphere. Further analyzing Bo Bardi’s usage of the ‘subtle substances’ in

her architecture, Oliveira (2006) helps to visualize the image of the Glass House in state

of flux between elements of plants, time, light, water:

…‘plant structures’ pass through Lina’s buildings, nor are these elements the only

devices Lina uses to communicate time. ‘Light’, another of Lina’s substances, can

also play this role. For Lina light leads to vertigo, either because it is indefinite

and enters from all sides (the MASP and the Glass House) or because it pours in

81
 from high up and floods the building as if it were water. […] Light and water, as

well as glass and water, are simply distinct states of the same material. (Oliveira,

2006, pp. 339, 340)

The orthogonal openings of the atrium and the horizontal line of glass walls bring

the natural light into the house which allows the plants to grow at the center of the house.

Functionally, this central focal point not only creates the feeling of orientation within the

house, but also thematically integrates the four areas in the large glazed lounge.

Approximately 250 m2 in size, the lounge is comprised of the successional disparate parts

linked by clear boundaries, which is also an instance of the ‘attribute’ integration of parts

to wholes for the Biophilic experience of space and place: “a large living room spanning

twenty meters (66 ft.) along the southeastern side, an entry hall in the center, a library on

the northeastern side, and a dining room on the southwestern corner” (Lima, 2013, p. 58).

At the end of staircase, such a precursor of the metaphorical works in the house

can be seen standing on the wall of a small, dark vestibule. It is indirectly lit by sun

shimmers from the glazed door and welcomes visitors:

A dialog on the relationship between architecture and nature, the house welcomed

the visitor with an enigmatic mural, a replica in mosaic of a work by de Chirico,

titled A Metaphysical Interior. This visual moniker, and the fact that publications

of the house were often accompanied by advertisements for the materials and

systems employed, is another example of the predominance of strategies of

82
 display, representation and narrative in Bo Bardi’s activities. (Veikos, 2014, pp.

18, 19)

This vestibule is also a preamble of the welcoming ceremony seen upon entering

the house. Visitors’ attentions are directed to a big solitary tree in the glass atrium. This

atrium as an epic welcoming stage functions as such a showcase; it deferentially displays

nature, the actual host of the house. Avoiding any visual distractions in design, these kind

of idiosyncratic transitional spaces also serve as the integration of parts to whole, in line

with the ‘experiences and attributes’ of the Biophilic Design as mentioned before. While

these transitional spaces integrally link the four areas in the glazed lounge, they also

provide a connection to the natural landscapes and ecosystems from the ground to the

sky; to nature in other words, which is the biggest whole (by the direct experience of

nature and its ‘attributes’ air, plants, light, weather, animals, and water). The space

orientation is directed in the house by following this central stage-like entry hall.

A plain white wall at the right side of entrance with small disguised doors screens

the privacy of everyday life in the kitchen, bedrooms and service areas which are

developed behind this wall in the scheme (Figure 4.38). The ‘route architecture’ proceeds

in the living room of the house. When visitors faced southeast i.e. to the front glaze wall,

at the right side of the lounge there is a living room organized around a fireplace, which

shows the character of a collective space “as suggested by Wright – whose works and

theories interested her at the time – and related to site strategies deployed by organic

architects.” (Lima, 2013, p. 77) This fireplace is another element which promotes

83
integration of parts to wholes as well as the direct experience of nature by the fire

‘attribute’ in lounge.

When attention wanders towards the horizon, a view of sky, forest canopy and

city is seen that is contracted in the glass frame of the house. Regarding this, Oliveira

(2006, p. 367) describes Bo Bardi’s ‘sense of inhabiting’ as “living as a conscious

presence in a place where the world contracts, where there should be no difference

between house and city.” Similarly, this idea could be found within the components,

which “are constantly in dialogue with her architecture –they support it. They appear in

much of her work: small objects and jewels that Lina created using recuperated and

recycled materials; that chair made with tree trunks found on a roadside…” as the counter

of “culture of progress and consumption.” (Oliveira, 2006, pp. 31, 33)

Soon after the house was completed, the Bardis furnished the large living room

with artworks, objects, books, and a few chairs Bo Bardi designed (she refused to

have sofas), including her celebrated bowl chair with its simple four-legged steel

support and an upholstered and stackable concave seat containing two circular

cushions. (Lima, 2013, p. 58)

These objects could be analogous to the Glass House when viewed from their

aspects of non-rectilinear floating forms, envisaged colors, and slender structures, which

are similar to the lightness and transparency given off from the house. Also, “the tactile

properties of this furniture link it directly to the ‘organic’ furniture”, designed as a

84
resultant of studies and observations on the human body, posture and their customs

(Oliveira, 2006, p. 76).

In contrast to the steel skeleton construction of the front part, which gives the

feeling of a suspended house, the rear block of the house has a solid construction with

white masonries perforated with trellised shutter windows painted in green (Lina Bo

Bardi 100: Brazil's alternative path to modernism, 2014, pp. 195, 196). Bo Bardi’s

idiosyncratic method of contextualization of the architecture in the Glass House

dramatizes a poetic discourse. It is an epitome of composite structure of a modern house

and traditional vernacular, with many references to both styles using the modern, local

and/or pre-existing techniques, elements and the materials.

Sitting on a same level of a slab with the front part on the sloped ground, the

traditional vernacular rear block of the Glass House is cautiously divided into two

sections; the family bedroom block, and the service wing. The Glass House could be

perceived just as a living room considering Bo Bardi’s generosity to provide space for

social activities (Oliveira, 2006, p. 102). The small sized bedrooms (allocated on size

approximately of 9 m2 for the two employees bedroom, 12 m2 for the guest bedroom, and

24 m2 for the master bedroom) have “enough space for sleeping but not much more,

resonating with the functionalist principle of minimum existence” (Oliveira, 2006, p. 66;

Lima, 2013, p. 80). The emphasis on the ‘function’ in the rear block of the Glass House

could be perceived as a forceful push by the architect to go out of the ‘box architecture’

needed for enough privacy in the house. For the front block, the architect also attempts to

85
push for the attendance to life (social and natural) –infused into the glazed front block of

the house.

The bedrooms are just for sleeping in, they are ‘functional’. This attitude is also

clear from the small area she allocates for them compared to the lounge of the

Glass House. […] In Lina’s houses the bedroom is not cozy, and even the

cupboards are generally in another room so that any possibility of ‘bourgeois

comfort’ is avoided. These bedrooms look austere, and they are similar in that

they contain just a bed, a bedside table and a chair. Sleeping is just a physical

need. (Oliveira, 2006, pp. 66, 67)

The kitchen, with its independent, flat and planted roof is the only mass that

bridges the two wings of the rear block. An Arbeitsküche kitchen equipped in a rational

style is projected into the center of the house to function as an important role in

conjunction with the private, social and service areas. The kitchen equipment works to

simplify tasks, as required in modern houses, referring to Existenzminimun and the

Bauhaus (Oliveira, 2006, p. 67). In contrast to the modern theme of this section in the

house, a few meters away “two brick adobe ovens built by Caboclos [mestizo peasants]”

are subjoined to enrich the reverberations of rural traditions (Lima, 2013, p. 60).

The square layout of the house is detached by a courtyard placed in between the

two wings of the rear block. This sealed courtyard, inaccessible from the inside, plays an

important role in perception of the unity at the building volume. At the extracted void of

the building volume, named ‘rose courtyard’, the monopitch roof of the service wing

86
aligns with the inclination of the gable roof above the core structure. This provides

continuous perception in horizontal and vertical dimensions, above the square layout of

the building with their shared slab. The thought of unity which is seen here forms the

geometry of the house. Also, it suggests the Psychology theories developed in the 1920’s

in Germany: The Gestalt Principles, meaning a “unified whole” in visual perception. In

this context, operating Biophilic ‘attributes’, such as the integration of parts to wholes,

and a visual transitional space, this ‘rose courtyard’ provides privacy to the individual

bedrooms located at the family section. This section views the courtyard and the blank

wall of the service wing through the simple windows at each room and accesses the

outside view and the natural light through the day. This area would be the only space

suggesting the refuge experience with its shutter windows adjustable for the light, except

the exhibition room at the ground level which is a mimesis of a cave buried into the

ground slope – “like a grotto” Bo Bardi would say (Lima, 2013, p. 183). Considering that

the house has abundant and continuous prospect views, and is filled by sun light with

open and translucent walls, this ‘grotto’ designed to display some artwork could be

another epitome of a space in the house that contains opposite poles in it, secluded and

exposed simultaneously. It also illustrates the ‘attributes’ of the indirect experience of

nature by simulating natural light and air, naturalistic shape and forms, and evoking

nature, when considering softer light, experience of shape and form, and imaginative

depiction in the space created via this cave-like ‘third place’.

In the course of time, Bo Bardi thinks of a possible addition to the Glass House.

In 1970s, she envisages the extension as a pavilion flowing down the hill in various

87
directions inside the boundaries of the seven thousand square meter property. However,

this scheme has never been published (Oliveira, 2006, p. 315). In 1986, with a similar

method of production by Wright in Taliesin West in regard to the use of site as an

experimental lab of local sources, Bo Bardi constructs her studio to the foot of the hill

which is “a simple, traditional timber construction with a gable roof.” (Lina Bo Bardi

100: Brazil's alternative path to modernism, 2014, p.196).

The additions Bo Bardi designed around the main house – a small studio,

detached housekeeper’s house resembling the rear part of the house, a new garage

covered with mosaic replacing a metal car porch, and, much later, her cabinlike

office – were her refuge for experimenting with traditional and organic materials

and forms. (Lima, 2013, p. 62)

The architect’s studio, called the casinha (little house), is located at the northern

part of the site in a bamboo grove, and has its own entrance on Rua Bandeirante Sampaio

Soares. This symmetrical rustic cabin sits on an orthogonal grid of elevated masonry

foundation, with a base of approximately fifty square meters (538 sq. ft.). The space is

allocated on the three platforms programmed for different workspaces, and enclosed by

the sliding modular plywood panels doubled with screens for the natural light and air

circulation. The rough eucalyptus piers support the construction and the shelves

longitudinally running through the center of the building. Covered by a small roof

garden, the conjoint square masonry volume encloses the small kitchen and the bathroom,

and it is divided from the wooden cabin by a diagonal partition (Lima, 2013, pp. 183,

184). The studio is connected to the Glass House by the “three narrow, stone-stepped

88
pathways and masonry retaining walls covered with gravel and colorful ceramic bits, as

she had in other residential projects” (Lima, 2013, p. 184). Lima (2013) interprets the

importance of this small size building which also incorporates very much of the Biophilic

Design ‘attributes’ within the scope of this project:

This unassuming project (the smallest building in Bo Bardi’s career) combines

educated elements from different historic and geographic citations together with

spontaneous improvisation, which, in her opinion, was the most meaningful

feature of Brazilian culture. (p. 184)

Bo Bardi has been an idealist architect manifesting that “I am an architect, I break

walls” (Bo Bardi, n.d.; as cited in Volckers & Farenholtz, 2014, p. 15) and building the

Glass House with an aim pursued though her oeuvre. Furthermore, she also said that “I

felt that the world could be saved, changed for the better, that this was the only task

worth living for, the point of departure for surviving.” (Bo Bardi, n.d. in Ferraz, 1993, as

cited in Oliveira, 2006, p. 355) However, the architect’s disillusion about the recent

context of beautiful Morumbi could be interpreted from her utterance that today the

house is the only representative of Brazilian Rain Forest as a relic in the neighborhood:

Today the glass house represents, along with what remains of the old Brazilian

forest, a poetic memory of that which could have been a great “reserve”, the great

City Park, with its valuable plants and wildlife, with the little chapel (badly

restored but which today could be saved), with its Real Park, the happy homes of

humble and poor people, but owners of simple houses and happy gardens, an

89
example of a popular complex that refutes the current solutions for the habitation

problem, and the dramatic absence of a Master Plan for the City of São Paulo. (Bo

Bardi, n.d. ; as cited in Lina Bo Bardi, 1994, p. 81)

90
 Chapter 4

Data Analyzes, Findings, and Discussions

Garden & House, Tokyo, Japan (2006-2011)

The entirety is a wall-less, transparent building, designed to provide an

environment with maximum sunlight despite the dark site conditions and the best
comfort and delight in life in this exceptional location in the heart of Tokyo.
(Ryue Nishizawa, 2007)

With more distinct contextual surroundings than the other case studies analyzed in

this research, the ‘Garden & House’ project (Appendix C) helps to display the twenty-

first century’s urban conditions and its sociocultural formative structures in an intense

urban environment (Figure 4.39). Tokyo, being typical of the global capitals, is a good

representative of the century’s ever-changing urbanization situation. Regarding these

evolving conjunctures in the architectural scene and urban stage, which encompass the

sweep of Japanese postwar history, it seems the contemporary Japanese architecture is

“the most successful at engendering new spatial phenomena and experiences” in the

global arena of the discipline (Igarashi, 2016, p. 191).

The ‘Garden & House’ project makes it possible to analyze the new meaning

given to the concept of a ‘green façade’ (Figure 4.40) by the architect, who suggests

‘proposing an open lifestyle’, while critically considering the project’s commentary on

Japanese culture. Nishizawa considers that Asian cities ‘used to be nature integrated’

until they started to get more closed off and lose characteristics of openness (as cited in

Nuijsink, 2012, pp. 133, 141).

Speculatively, the idiosyncrasy of the project could be considered as a trait of

strong rejection to the surrounding urban chaos, manifesting its own identical ‘nature

91
integrated identity’. The Garden & House defies the usual, giant concrete blocks with its

didactic quality. It defeats their devastative massiveness with its ironically diminutive

footprint and open structure. Furthermore, it possesses an inductive element, which

creates communication between the building and occupants of the city, allowing the

building itself to become a critic of the century’s social conjunctures. Conversely, the

building is, as an environment, a correspondence to the metropolitan life, an attempt to

embrace being part of everyday, to highlight the delight of being in touch with everyday

needs (Figure 4.41).

“A Japanese Constellation” (2016), which have been brought to fruition by the

Curator Pedro Gadanho as an exhibition and catalogue book during his appointment at

Contemporary Architecture at The Museum of Modern Art (MoMA), has been an

enlightening resource for this research; highlighting a luminous configuration of Japanese

architects and the formal inventiveness and influential relationships in profession they

display which has brought a radical mode to the twenty-first century. The work compiled

by Gadanho “highlights the significant structural innovations and use of transparent and

lightweight materials, while foregrounding the architects’ refreshing commitment to the

social lives of their buildings, reviving a social conscience that characterized earlier

avant-gardes” (Lowry, 2016, p. 7).

Contemporary Japanese architecture’s success is attributed to its reinterpretation

of the past with fluidly defined spaces, incorporation of earthy materials with natural

light, and an innovative blend of nature, which, in a sense, is a trademark of Japanese

design. Moreover, it is also a prominently distinctive trait that “their sensibility that

speaks to a human-oriented yet innovative everyday life is proving a hit abroad,” as

92
Professor Erez Golani Solomon says (as cited in Kageyama, 2014). “This understanding

of the connection between nature and the man-made is Japanese”; pointing out this

definitive culture, Japanese architect Sou Fujimoto evidences the most instrumental

notion and mutual successive factor featured in Japanese designs: “Some European and

American architects say it is important to have intermediate space, between inside and

outside. But our approach is different. Everything is intermediate” (as cited in Kageyama,

2014).

The disappearing connection, interaction and integration within the relations,

affiliations and environments ‘between humans-nature’, and more so ‘between humans’

have been conducted by global forces. These forces include sociocultural vectors,

economic fluctuations and instabilities, popular choices on wave of consumerism over

production, advance information systems, the most ironically the advance communication

tools, media, technology, and the increase of underdeveloped infrastructures. These are

the concomitants of fast and spontaneous development in the urbanization. In a broader

perspective, these forces have been instrumental from the end of utopian late nineteenth

century with the hopes it had propounded in the light of new era, machine age. The

evolution had continued in an increasing pace with the flux of modernism throughout the

world (most effectively in the West) during the twentieth century. Since the 1960s, they

have slowly conduced to the formation of today’s contemporary Japanese architecture by

means of the influences of modernism. In the abstract, the contemporary architecture in

Japan has been and was born as a reaction to the global and local conjunctures, yet with

the trait of correspondence to overcome and to survive from the oppressive forces and

steamrollers that have appeared with different names and identities along with the

93
twentieth century and turn of the millennia. Japanese architects have been impelled to

explore new ways of facing problems and new social conditions, having “explored the

renewal of tradition, of radical spatial possibilities, and of the innovative potential of

sustainable design” (Gadanho, 2016, p. 12). Such new ways can face the speed pace of

urbanization tune in technological and social change.

Contemporary architecture in Japan has progressed within “a genealogy of talent

by diagramming the mentor-pupil relationships established through various relationships

established through various universities and studio practices” (Igarashi, 2016, p. 189).

When looking at the seat of Nishizawa in this genealogy, it could be appropriate to place

the architect in the third generation coming after Toyo Ito and Kazuyo Sejima. Even

though Nishizawa acknowledges the influences of Le Corbusier and Mies van der Rohe

in his work (M. Echanove, personal communication, October 5, 2008), Ito has been an

immensely influential figure for both architects Sejima and Nishizawa (The Pritzker

Architecture Prize Ceremony Acceptance Speech, 2010, para. 5). Ito’s emphasis on

“designing architectural skins” to create “light and open spaces”, was born with the

pursuit of new spatial qualities, corresponding to the 1980s recovered economy and the

time’s “newfound corporeality,” is also observed in Nishizawa’s works. Ito’s avant-garde

sensibility, and responsible perspective on ethics and society has been influential to his

structures starting to “open themselves to the city” and nature, “to reestablish the

relationship between architecture and society.” This also opens the way of successive

generations encouraging them to bring innovative evolution of local by experiment

(Igarashi, 2016, p. 190). In this context, Ito (1989) urges “his contemporaries to retain

experimentation as an essential trait of what he called a “vibrant and stimulating”

94
architecture that is “generated at the margins,” and thus distinguishes itself from mass

processes of production and consumption” (as cited in Gadanho, 2016, p.12), which

could be seen at the marginal character of the Garden & House project.

This new “subtle but influential sensitivity of some Japanese architects was

emerging through the crevices of the previous establishment and flourishing,” and their

globally rising impact also “began to be received as a new mood”. The works of these

Japanese architects have been “distinctly contextual, embracing local traditions and

blending with the existing city” (Gadanho, 2016, p.11) centered on “a desire to invent

new architectural principles by dismantling established formal hierarchies and replacing

them with architectural forms appropriate for the twenty-first century” (Igarashi, 2016, p.

191); and also are cited as “alternative modernism”. The traits of alternative modernism

in the works of SANAA (Sejima and Nishizawa and Associates) come to the forefront by

the “kind of simple geometries intrinsic to modernism”. However, the design and the

space they create has become more distinctive and inventive, “previously unimaginable”

(Igarashi, 2016, p. 191).

SANAA does this very elegantly as if in pursuit of potentialities left unfinished by

modern architecture. For this reason, we might call it “alternative modernism,” a

form of modernism that could have been. […] Alternative modernism exists

within the framework of modernism for its contemporaneous use of building

materials that epitomize the modern period, such as steel, concrete, and glass.

However, the difference lies in alternative modernism’s integration of computer

technologies into design, enabling the exploration of altogether distinct

95
 potentialities previously underdeveloped by modernism (Igarashi, Onoda,

Kanada, & Goto, 2005; as cited in Igarashi, 2016, p. 191).

Sejima and Nishizawa in 2010 have been chosen as the Laureates of the Pritzker

Architecture Prize, which is granted annually to a living architect/s for significant

achievement and is referred to as “the profession’s highest honor” since 1979. The work

of SANAA is elaborately valued in the jury’s report in such words:

For architecture that is simultaneously delicate and powerful, precise and fluid,

ingenious but not overly or overtly clever; for the creation of buildings that

successfully interact with their contexts and the activities they contain, creating a

sense of fullness and experiential richness; for a singular architectural language

that springs from a collaborative process that is both unique and inspirational.

(The Pritzker Architecture Prize Jury Citation, 2010, para. 7)

It would be speculated that the same traits are rendered in the Garden & House

project as they are in Nishizawa and SANAA’s other works. In the ceremony speech of

Pritzker Award, Lord Palumbo (2010), chairman of the jury, remarks on the “underlying

core qualities” that Sejima and Nishizawa share: “sensitivity; restraint; a highly attuned

lightness of touch; a tenderness and gentleness carried only by those who have a

profound love; knowledge and understanding of nature; and an acute awareness of the

environment in which their work is placed.”

The conceptual interests specific to the contemporary discourse of Japanese

architecture evolve around the terms; “nature, publicness, lightness, and abstraction” as

grouped by Julian Worrall. Integrated into culture, reference to “nature” occupies a

96
pivotal place as part of discussions in Japanese architecture. “The term ‘nature,’ however,

has no singular meaning” (Worrall, 2016, p. 245):

In the work of Sejima and Nishizawa, individually as well as in collaboration, the

concept of nature merges with notions of “environment” and “landscape,” terms

that are less about ecology than they are an idea of publicness—the organization

and qualities of spaces of interpersonal encounter and interaction. […] Publicness

relates to access, use, and occupation (in the sense of occupying space); it

conveys openness and spontaneity. “Publicness” […] connotes bottom-up rather

than top-down decision-making processes; popular rather than official affiliations;

and an emphasis on freedom rather than control. The term thus carries a critical

charge tinged with the traces of a radical politics. (Worrall, 2016, p. 246)

The secondary meaning carried by the notion of “nature” is observed in the

doctrines of Wright and Bo Bardi too. It takes place in Bo Bardi’s later public projects

with a social meaning (Oliveira, 2006, p. 327) as the same attitude taken by Nishizawa,

which is “seen in the dissolved perimeters” (Worrall, 2016, p. 246) of his works. The

architect also states that “we are not providing the content, so for us it is important to

create as free space as possible” (Nishizawa, 2009; 2012, p. 72). This attitude enables the

“equivalence of spaces”; a stance for democracy, which is also mentioned by Wright

when the architect brought up the ‘Destruction of the Box’ approach, seeking freedom to

ease occupants physically, physiologically and psychologically (Wright, Lucas, & Frank

Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 21). These ideas manifested by the architects are

integrated into inclusive pattern analyses of human occupation in space and interaction in

built environments and ‘boundaries’: ‘public and private spaces’, and ‘nature’ (Worrall,

97
2016, p. 246). “Sejima/Nishizawa/SANAA oeuvre, these ideas are mobilized using

architectural strategies inspired by the openness and loose spatial structure of landscape”

(Worrall, 2016, p. 246).

It may be tempting to view Sejima and Nishizawa’s refined compositions of

lightness and transparency as elitist or rarefied. Their aesthetic, however, is one of

inclusion. Their approach is fresh; always offering new possibilities within the

normal constraints of an architectural project as it systematically takes the next

step. They use common, everyday materials while remaining attuned to the

possibilities of contemporary technology; their understanding of space does not

reproduce conventional models. They often opt for non-hierarchical spaces, or in

their own words, the “equivalence of spaces,” creating unpretentious, democratic

buildings according to the task and budget at hand. (The Pritzker Architecture

Prize Jury Citation, 2010, para. 4)

This approach to “nature” and “publicness” also makes possible the mentioning of

another term, “field […] which entails design development from the bottom-up, where

smaller units or relationships are aggregated without first imposing, top-down, a macro-

level organization […] also exists within the lexicon of landscape metaphors […] that

register Sejima, Nishizawa…” (Worrall, 2016, p. 247). Even though there are no

published theoretical treatises from the architects yet, they have not stayed indifferent to

wider conversations of the discipline in the world; as praised in Jury’s Citation “they are

cerebral architects, whose work is based on rigorous investigation and guided by strong

and clearly defined concepts” (The Pritzker Architecture Prize Jury Citation, 2010, para.

6). Concordantly, Worrall (2016, p. 247) attributes the notion of “field” to the approach

98
of “nature” and “publicness”, and to Stan Allen’s statement of theoretical principles in

architecture, called “field conditions”, which have been circulating in the discourses of

discipline since the late 1990s (Allen, 1999, pp. 90-103):

Allen uses the term to describe “any formal or spatial matrix capable of unifying

diverse elements while respecting the identity of each,” (Allen, 1999, p. 90) a

relationship between part and whole that transcends principles of formal and

spatial composition in both classical and modernist modes. Compositions

generated under field conditions are concerned with local relations between

elements and remain relatively indifferent to overall form. They express

repetition, porosity, and interconnection, and contain something of the

organizational characteristics of flocks, swarms, and crowds. They facilitate

change, accident, and improvisation. (Worrall, 2016, p. 247)

Worrall (2016, p. 247) also ties the ideas of “lightness” and “abstraction” with

another term “minimalism”. While the terms “nature” and “publicness” speak about the

architectural ideologies, Worrall (2016, p. 247) relates “lightness” and “abstraction” to

“aesthetic effects and conceptual methodology”. Lightness has been the evident notion

that could be seen in the ‘limpid’ spaces found in Sejima and Nishizawa’s works (p. 247).

Italo Calvino (1988) suggests in the book Six Memos for the Next Millennium that

“lightness captures something essential about experience in our networked, mobile,

urbanized era – its weightlessness, its velocity, its airy detachment from historical place,

physical materiality, or weighty consequence” (as cited in Worrall, 2016, p. 248). Also,

when talking about the use of ‘white’, which is more than being a default color related to

99
SANAA’s design, Nishizawa remarks the feeling it gives, which is “lightness” (M.

Echanove, personal communication, October 5, 2008).

The use of white as the default color with which to elaborate architectural ideas

recalls the whiteness of the works of early modernists such as Le Corbusier and

Walter Gropius, and signals (whether consciously or not) an alignment with the

modernist methodology of exploring formal and spatial concepts abstracted from

their material supports. (Fujimori 2016, p. 73; Buntrock, 2010; as cited in

Worrall, 2016, p. 247)

This explains Nishizawa’s choice of white color over the natural colors for the

sake of the “abstraction”. The architect also mentions the same “lightness” he finds in

industrial materials such as, aluminum, steel, concrete, Perspex and concrete. Due to their

softness and plasticity, they are ready to be manipulated at every form of creation. That is

the reason Nishizawa states these industrial materials are natural materials too, from his

point of view (Nishizawa, 2009/2012, p.68). It could display how the ‘attributes’ of

Biophilic Design, such as natural colors and natural materials for the indirect experience

of nature, might be interpreted in a variety of different ways beyond their definitions, and

still foster the ‘relations’ with nature in the built environment as is seen in the abstractive

attitude of Nishizawa (Figure 4.42).

We are very much interested in architecture’s relationship with nature, the way

architecture appears together with the surroundings. This is one of the important

things that we want to develop. Using acrylic or aluminum or this kind of material

creates more complex relations between nature and the architecture. Another

thing is that we love architecture opening up to the outside, to invite people to

100
 come in, and come out, very free architecture with no boundary dividing inside

and outside. (Nishizawa, 2010/2012, p.87)

The “abstraction” also can be found in the “reduction and purification of ever

more direct, unelaborated modes” in Sejima and Nishizawa’s works (Worrall, 2016, p.

247). The nation’s financial conditions in the 1980s bring restraint and directness in every

area, including in the architecture field. As an imprint of these conditions the word

‘economy’ becomes the synonym of ‘minimalism’ in contemporary Japanese architecture

(Worrall, 2016, p. 248). “This economy of means, however, does not become a simple

reductive operation in the architects’ (refers Sejima and Nishizawa) hands” (The Pritzker

Architecture Prize Jury Citation, 2010, para. 3). The operation of their works is

conceptualized on experimentalist terms as seen also in the organization of Wright’s and

Bo Bardi’s works. “Ideas are considered and discarded, reconsidered and reworked until

only the essential qualities of a design remain” (The Pritzker Architecture Prize Jury

Citation, 2010, para. 3). The “do more with less” (Steele, 2017, p. 201-205) notion also

has unavoidably been accepted as an aesthetic principle by the constraints of economy

and increasing occupation of urban lands. However, it is also noted that “the material

attenuations and spatial purifications in the work of Sejima and Nishizawa arise from

carefully manipulated spatial boundaries” (Worrall, 2016, p. 248). The Garden & House

project could be considered an instantiation with its diminutive scale of land and its

significant, multiscalar accomplishment of creating “the boundary between the space of

the city and space of dwelling indeterminate and fluid” (Blau, 2010, para. 15), which

captures the dynamics and energy of urban life.

101
 The combination of lightness and abstraction is salient to Japanese minimalism.

An emphasis on simplicity, reduction, and focused attention has been an enduring

feature of the tradition of the Japanese tea ceremony since the time of the great tea

master Sen no Rikyu (1522-1591) and the associated aesthetic philosophy of

wabi-sabi, which finds beauty and value in subtlety, imperfection, and austerity.

(Koshiro, 1995; as cited in Worrall, 2016, p. 248)

Although influences from those aesthetic conceptions and sensitivity to nature in

Japanese culture have been observed in Wright’s and Bo Bardi’s works, Sejima and

Nishizawa emphasize their focus on surrounding conditions: “We do not transform

Japanese elements into our own architectural language. We might be inspired by history

or tradition, but this could come from any country or culture…It is all about context” (as

cited in Feireiss, 2006, p. 64; & in Blau, 2010, para. 18). In this context, to explore the

constitutional “architectonic relationships—of part to part, part to whole, organization to

structure, materials to techniques, light to space, surface to volume, edge to boundary,

interior to exterior—as well as for recalibrating scalar relationships between building,

city, landscape, and territory” (Blau, 2010, para. 15). Nishizawa (2007) accentuates the

main focus of his work which could reflect the architect’s new interpretation of cultural

and ecological attachment to place, integration of parts to whole, and transitional spaces

which are the ‘attributes’ of the experience of space and place in the calibrated focal

point of Biophilic Design:

My notion of the site environment was used to be the issue of configuration, in

other words, “how the site environment is defined and placed within the volumes

of the surrounding conditions”. However, such notion has been gradually

102
 extended a little further, to take into consideration of the environment as a

scenery. I hope the design of a building can produce an aspect of today’s social

and cultural scenery. Another theme is “how a building is used”. I think of what it

means to use a house or a museum through the design process. That is to design a

building redefining the ‘usage of a building’, rather than to fit my design into the

‘usage of a building’ pre-defined in today’s society. My generation has been

living in a lifestyle quite different from the past; therefore the ‘way of living’ has

also changed. I think it is one of the important possibilities of architecture to

reflect such lives and values of today into the creation of space. That will

gradually reveal a new image of a housing concept, which is responsible for

reflecting today’s ways of living. (Nishizawa, 2007, p. 271)

Centered on these thoughts, Nishizawa builds the Garden & House (2006-2011)

on an extremely small site (base area of a rectangular shape thirteen feet (four meters)

wide, and twenty-six feet (eight meters) length) surrounded by tall residential towers over

30 meters of height, in a dense commercial district of high-rise condominiums and office

buildings at downtown Tokyo. Nishizawa mentions the first impression of the site as a

“small dark valley surrounded by mountainous construction” (Nishizawa, 2013, p. 16)

referring to the large buildings with no setbacks standing adjacent to both directions and

across the street. The challenging issues of the site form the defiant character of the

building: “The entirety is a wall-less transparent building designed to provide an

environment with maximum sunlight despite the dark site condition” (Nishizawa, 2013,

p. 16).

103
 In the context of Japan’s extremely dense capital, verticality means above all

extremely close. Local building codes (nearly) do not impose a minimum set-back

distance, but require only that the buildings not be in contact with each other.

Naturally, it follows that the space between two buildings might be less than half

a metre. With these proximities the gap cannot be used to collect light, but only to

guarantee a minimum of ventilation. (Zancan, 2011, p. 39)

The 66-m2 building is programmed around the basic spatial needs addressed by

two women, who co-own a company in the editorial business. The clients “wish to work

and live in the historical environment” specifically requesting a program including “an

office, common living place, private room for each, guest room, and bathroom”

(Nishizawa, 2013, p. 16). Finding it “very difficult to put this project into an existing

typological category” (Nishizawa, n.d.; as cited in Nuijsink, 2012, p. 134), Nishizawa

says it creates an impression for the architect, “somewhere between an office, and a

residence, or a dormitory” (Nishizawa, 2013, p. 16). Reflecting on the clients’

metropolitan life style, orientated to century’s returns and incommodities living in this

specific spot of Tokyo, Nishizawa (n.d.) says “in my eyes, the way they live and make

use of a building is quite contemporary” ( as cited in Nuijsink, 2012, p. 134). The clients

also mention the bustle of life when they live in an “old, cold, and dark” traditional

Japanese house in a suburb of Tokyo, Asagaya, calling the twenty-minute walk to and

from the transportation area every day an “inconvenience”, especially “for people

running an office”. Despite the size and discomfort of the existing project site chosen by

the client with regards to daylight receptibility and the compacted context of the urban

fabric - typical of Tokyo. This little piece of land has been specifically inviting for the

104
client, as it allows a glimpse of the river behind the house from the higher level

platforms:

I like water… and I was delighted to have a view of the river. […] The

convenience of life in Tokyo is that everything you might want or need is within a

few steps of your home. […] So it’s easy to meet clients, visit art galleries and

museums, and browse major book stores for the latest publications. (as cited in

Nuijsink, 2012, p. 134-137)

The new culture of contemporary life has been in an evolutionary shift due to the

advances of technology and communication tools, which allows people to work at home,

or in offices that feel like home. The corresponding design of Nishizawa’s residences to

this new culture along with the blurred boundaries between these two types of typologies

also influence new ways of working and new work place designs. These typological

indeterminations Nishizawa refers to are cited in the book New Demographics New

Workspace (Myerson, Bichard, & Bichard, 2010) as an influential creative design scheme

for the contemplation settings in the workplace: (Myerson, Jeremy, et al. , 2010) “…a

contemplation space should be a break from the corporate open plan, and provide

elements of domesticity.” Nishizawa’s contemporary, mixed-use dwellings incorporate

“furniture for recuperation and relaxation, natural green elements to instill calm, and an

open environment to inspire deep thought” (Myerson, Bichard, & Bichard, 2010, p. 123).

As it is typical of global cities; the scarcity of green public spaces is pointed as the

“missing” entity of Tokyo by Nishizawa (n.d.) which has been the determinant of the

design of the Garden & House as a “house like a garden, with lots of plants” (as cited in

Nuijsink, 2012, p. 134). The architect elaborately explains the phrase of ‘a house like a
105
garden space’ in the notion of wholeness he perceives, which would again be attributed to

the integration of parts to whole, and to the transitional spaces ‘attributes’ of Biophilic

Design, which create the experience of space and place:

I think an interior space has some kind of homogeneous quality, but there is a

diverse qualities [sic] once stepping out to a garden space, of the vegetation, the

wind, the smell and the scenery. In case of ‘House A’ (2006), I thought of a space

produced by frames rather than a box pierced with the holes of windows, and a

space loosing [sic] the notion of interior and exterior to bring out a continuity

when seen as a whole. Such notion remained in my mind while I was designing

‘Garden & House’ (2006- ). (Nishizawa, 2007, p. 270)

The limited size of the project site leads to the vertically stacked programs

integrated with the open garden façade, which closely relates to the dynamics of the

street. Regular frame walls and interior walls have been omitted on the surface area of the

building to maximize the already narrow usable space of 26-m2 four layers of horizontal

slabs, which unfold the vertical structure of the building. The rooms are enclosed by the

full-height glazed surfaces set back from the façade, “garnished only with the thin pillar

downspouts” (Zancan, 2011, p. 36), to allow maximum natural light and air to pass

through each floor’s internal and external spaces. This enables growth of vegetation,

which “colonizes different spaces in each one of the levels”, while “increasing the

sensation of openness and immateriality of the house” (Office of Ryue Nishizawa, 2015,

p. 174). Each room is designed smaller than the size of these horizontal slabs for an

optimal and distinct configuration of the room and garden paired at each floor

(Nishizawa, 2013, p. 16):

106
 …whether it is the living room, private room, or bathroom, has a garden of its

own so the residents may go outside to feel the breeze, read a book or cool off in

the evening and enjoy an open environment in their daily life. (Nishizawa, 2013,

p. 16)

The unique architectural promenade of the house (Figure 4.43) is set by a steel

custom-made white painted spiral staircase with 68 cm wide treads; pass through the

“clean, precise and unfinished holes formed in concrete” (Zancan, 2011, p. 36) platforms.

This creates a passage from one moment to another in a vertical mode of mobility and

wayfinding, which is an unusual and interesting way of reflecting the ‘attribute’ of the

experience of space and place in a very small scale building. The structural skeleton of

the building has been developed to resist tremors of possible earthquakes, and the space

of it reduced to a minimum by the “three square concrete columns that become thinner

towards the top. They divide each floor into separate areas without the use of rigid walls”

explains the project architect Taeko Nakatsubo (Nakatsubo, n.d.; as cited in Nuijsink,

2012, p. 141). The interior skeleton of load bearing columns, horizontal full-height

windows at free façades, roof garden at the top, and the free plan of the building recall

the principles of Le Corbusier’s five points of modern architecture:

The concept of the plan libre (free plan) allows one to approach the notion of

verticality as a specific architectural typology, in both residential and public

applications, and takes into account a series of issues: the relationship between

high- and low-rise patterns of building; the encounter between the markedly anti-

urban aspects of modernist canons and the city of today; and the actual rapport

107
 between public and private, individual and collective social structures. (Zancan,

2011, p. 30)

Discarding a conventional structure of porticoes at the entrance, which would

need much more space to occupy, the living room is developed on the ground floor of the

building. In the living room, “a small Le Corbusier sofa – right inside the front door –” is

placed with a perspective of “the entire ground floor: a compact all-in-one arrangement

that includes entrance and dining areas, kitchen, study and library” (Nuijsink, 2012, p.

141). The clients assure that the open façade of the house is definitely not an issue to live

in. The interstitial fabric of the façade, supported by the exemplary soft and subtle

elements; air, plants, and operable Indian saris curtains, take place within the overlap

space of the private and public zone of urban life. Against the backdrop of the diacritical

disposition of the building’s design, Nakatsubo (n.d.) comments on the function of it:

“from the outside, you cannot tell whether it is a house, a gallery or a restaurant. […] The

function of this building can be changed very easily” (as cited in Nuijsink, 2012, p. 141).

This unusual look of the building to passers-by speculatively ties to Nishizawa’s (2016,

p. 139) reflections on “The Social Landscape of Architecture”, also to the information

richness, and age, change, and the patina of time within a different perspective of the

indirect experience of nature:

Architecture has very broad repercussions. It is not only a private issue but also a

social one. People walk along the street and see buildings every day. This is one

of the more important things to happen in a city: architecture creates a landscape

and an atmosphere for people, for life. Architecture’s forms and roles have

evolved in correspondence with social values and will continue doing so.

108
 Thinking about a new architecture approximates thinking about new social values;

people use architecture variously in different places and times. A “home” in one

country or region is not necessarily the same as a “home” in another. Yet even

when it is made for an individual, architecture is also part of a collective

experience. For example, a building generally has a longer lifespan than a person.

A person might live between fifty and eighty years, while a building could last for

centuries. Given the significance of architectural space to everyday life, the

schematic of space is of grave importance for me. (Nishizawa, 2016, p. 139)

The tiny bedroom on the first floor (Figure 4.44) is furnished with a custom

designed bed to prevent any possible accident which could be caused by the open

staircase. An operable curtain to screen noise, sunlight and chilly wind on an elliptical

track at the balcony provides privacy as a soft enclosure for the outdoor space also used

for business meetings (Figure 4.45).

“A layer of earth finishes” (Nishizawa, 2016, p. 159) the second floor with a

concrete bench and planters that double function as parapets (Figure 4.46). The thought

of ‘fixed’ concrete furniture as components of the whole while designing a building is

also seen in Wright’s works including Taliesin West. The purpose of the thought is to

orient occupants to the best connection and interaction with nature and other important

elements in the context that need to be paid attention to spontaneously. The earth finish

on the floor introduces “nature as a constructive element in the house” (Nishizawa, 2016,

p. 159). It is the most densely planted layer of the building, and it houses a bathroom

(Figure 4.47) and an outdoor laundry; the client points out that it is “an ideal spot to enjoy

a beer after taking a hot bath” (as cited in Nuijsink, 2012, p. 137).

109
 The third floor accommodates a bedroom with a small office space in the balcony

enclosed by a concrete planter and circular Plexiglas railing which forms the boundaries

of it (Figures 4.48.a, and 4.48.b). The steel stairs lead “finally to the roof-terrace, where a

tiny room is located, used either as a guest room or extra storage” (Zancan, 2011, p. 36).

The city’s generally mild weather allows residents to use this terrace to get out of daily

work, and find respite with light breezes looking over the river view between the dense

city blocks of central Tokyo. The humid subtropical climate also makes it possible to use

climate control systems at the building provided by only a simple air conditioner placed

on the roof.

The warm and temperate weather conditions of the city give freedom to the

architect for interpreting openness and connection between the interior and exterior of the

building and for using the minimum structural materiality. It is worth noting that the

weather also encourages walking as a way of downtown transportation, superseding the

hours spent commuting every day. This maintains daily activities in a sustainable and

healthy way of living and working engaged with the modern city. The concept proposed

by the architect for the Garden & House with the intertwined gardens and interior

elements enables residents to “link their daily indoor activities to life outdoors”

(Nuijsink, 2012, p. 134). Concordantly, this city house in the central urban context makes

it apparent as well as coherent to the Biophilic Design ‘attribute’ the mobility and

wayfinding from a macro scale perspective, while displaying its integration as a part of

the city interlaced to the whole urban web. Considering that, it is “within walking

distance of Tokyo’s major traffic nodes,” say Nishizawa’s clients (as cited in Nuijsink,

2012, p. 137).

110
 It is quite apparent that Nishizawa’s concept of a ‘house like garden’ reflected in

his definitive design coherently conforms to the Biophilic Design ‘experiences and

attributes’, which are the variables of this research. The spatial characteristics of the

project, within the scope of the experience of space and place, are reflected in much

broader scales of integration of parts to wholes by linking building to the city. It is also

linked to a cultural and ecological attachment globally rather than locally, contrasting to

the quite tiny size of the actual building, in a manner of reaction as discussed earlier.

Within the building scale, Nishizawa links each sequential layer to the whole with a

central focal point – the white painted steel staircase, which is the main transitional space

devoted in the building area (Figure 4.49). It also introduces a simplistic character of

mobility and wayfinding. The ‘disparate floors’ represent the organized complexity with

their dissimilar space organization; each floor is variable and diverse with nature-oriented

transitional boundaries, which are softened by the green texture, receptive of natural light

full-height glass surfaces, and the operable curtains. The organism of a secure and

sheltered setting, Garden & House, is a refuge in the urban scale, yet a prospect as a

whole by itself concurrently because of its trait of openness. Nishizawa appreciates the

characteristic of openness because of the feeling that it gives; being “open to the outside,”

while “enclosed” in (Nishizawa, 2010/2012, p. 99).

In sum the project allows the direct experience of nature which refers to actual

contact with; light, air, water, plants, weather, animals, natural landscapes and

ecosystem in the context. Nishizawa’s design strategy to fulfill the need arising from lack

of greenery in the city scale also helps to sustain ecological services; for instance, it pulls

111
in birds as well as nutrient cycles and pollination, and sustains smaller eco-habitats, like

the micro scale ecosystems of the tiny habitats found in the building’s forested edge.

The indirect experience of nature, “refers to contact with […] the transformation

of nature from its original condition” (Kellert & Calabrese, p. 9), and it is interpreted

from a different viewpoint by Nishizawa. The architect emphasizes more of a social

atmosphere within landscapes created by architecture in different places and times which

is part of a collective experience and adaptive response to ever changing conditions. The

other ‘attribute’ of the indirect experience of nature, naturalistic shapes and forms, is

seen by the architect’s use of curvilinear organic forms that shape the balconies at the

front façade, circular oculus, and handrails at the roof top; this contrasts with the modern

geometry of rectangular form/typology and the vertical skeleton of the building. The

curvilinear organic forms transform the static profile into a dynamic one.

After an elaborate analysis of the Biophilic Design ‘experiences and attributes’ on

the conceptually and practically exemplary typology created by Nishizawa, it would be

appropriate to end this section of research with the architect’s own manifestation to honor

his ethical commitment:

As I think of the diverse but at the same time a transparent image of a garden

space, I began to think of not only the building as an object, but also the other

elements such as the wind coming into the space from the windows, their curtains,

the furniture, the plantings, and the exterior scenery. This image of a space is to

picture and involve the life style of the person who would live in. I do not intend

to produce something such as a ‘so-called house’ in general sense, but I do think

of creating a space to be utilized by actual people—I want to produce a building

112
that the residents would feel fulfilled by living in. I consider those ideas of

diversity or transparency would be one of the elements to produce such space.

(Nishizawa, 2007, pp. 270-271)

113
 Discussions Correlation

The primary research question probes the methods and applications of specific

natural phenomena to the built environments within the Framework of the Biophilic

Design Concept, which supports the Biophilia Hypothesis. The three research sites were

evaluated by the Biophilic Design Framework to define and better understand the

meaning of the Biophilic Design Concept and the Biophilia Hypothesis. The theoretical

and practical approaches applied to these research sites were unveiled and analyzed

through the three case studies. The overall success of these projects was displayed, being

evidenced by the respected resources and academic authorities. Regarding the success of

the case studies and their worldwide reputability related to their Biophilic characteristics,

a positive correlation is found by analyzing the research sites and critiques from the

authorities in written literatures. The applicability of the Biophilic Design Framework

(Kellert, & Calabrese, 2015) proven reasonable, and evidenced by these case studies

located in different climates, regions and contexts.

114
 Chapter 5

Conclusion

Conclusion and Discussions

Nature integrated environments suggested by the Biophilic Design Concept and

the Hypothesis of Biophilia foster the interaction of people with each other as well as

other species and nature. This is of vital importance to maintain health, and healthy and

satisfied habitats, sociocultural values, and the resource of life – the Earth. The habitat

conditions of species evolve in the capital of global forces. The developmental evolutions

in life and life conditions bring many comforts to human beings, along with the

accompanied discomforts, devolutions, and resolutions in the ecological, biological,

sociological, cultural systems, and many more. It is being observed in defined habitats

that, rising needs and comfort levels of human-beings result in alienation and isolation in

today’s more sterile environments. The question is, could it be possible to keep up with

these developmental evolutions and global changes without the destructive side effects

that accompany them?

This study displays the architects’ approach of producing methods along with

architecture’s forms and roles that correspond adaptively to the developmental

evolutions. Adaptability and resiliency are needed for habitable environments and ever-

changing ecosystems, which could be counted as ‘affected environments’ in the results.

This research study shows that a level of comfort is required for an adaptable life, and a

level of adaptation is required for a comfortable life/habitat. The research variables in

these case studies have been combined together with their unique time periods’

115
techniques and various materials, along with the distinct interpretations of the architects’

response to each site’s specific context.

Numerous prominent research, cited to strengthen the current paper’s viewpoint,

shows that only the ‘true ecosystems’ could be ‘the best fit’ for human needs

physiologically and psychologically. These ‘true ecosystems’ result in sustainable health

and wellbeing, as long as the communication and relationship with nature are not

impeded.

It should also be noted that the more interaction there is with nature, the more

stewardship of nature will follow to protect and contribute to the synergic domains of

life, as is suggested by the Biophilia Hypothesis. Furthermore, this interaction induces

positive social change, as is manifested by the architects of these case studies. The three

projects were built in different time periods, from the early twentieth century to the early

twenty-first century, and accompanied by the developments of modern life and the

stylistic movements of modernism in the Architecture discipline. However, all these

architects have chosen not to be restricted by any stylistic conventions and insensitive

molds, but rather developed their own idiosyncratic interpretations. They also have been

critics of their time and its issues, reaching forward to future methods. Nevertheless, none

of them have forgotten the requirements of healthy habitats and sustained relationships

with the outside world beyond the walls, which cage the modernized human being.

The architects have been inspired by ‘nature’ to ponder any possible solutions in

order to create more amplified connections and satisfied experiences in the built

environment. To create a better spatial experience, they have maximized the connections

between elements of nature and the built context. Whatever contextual condition their

116
project had on the sites, the architects have chosen to think beyond the size of the

building lot. They have connected to larger environments; buildings, gardens, streets,

neighborhoods, the city, the forest, the desert, and even further—to the globe. The

atmospheres that they have created include the interiors, sometimes even the tiniest

objects within the space.

The architects thought about people and other lives by involving the atmospheres

they created. Thus, they brought subtle methods compatible with the Biophilic Design

principles to incite creative behaviors for sustained health, relationships and

communication between individuals and other species. Ethically, they believe that these

principles are the starting point for healthy and sustained communities as well.

When the Biophilic features are analyzed in the case studies, it is seen that each

architect brings a different point of view to the ‘nature’ of and in the built environment.

Frank Lloyd Wright came up with a naturalistic and materialistic approach, while Lina

Bo Bardi was more on the philosophical and symbolistic side of it. As for Ryue

Nishizawa, the matter – nature – has rather been applied to social and abstract accessions

in the architect’s designs. The convergence and divergence of the architects’ ideas helped

this research present evidence to the essence of matter, which is ‘nature’ and applicability

of the Biophilic Design principles in diversified contexts. For instance, while Wright was

giving a larger place to the water element around his vast project context, Bo Bardi

utilized this element in a rather moderate size and gave special meaning to it from a

psychoanalytical or semiotic perspective. For instance, Bo Bardi enhances the meaning of

the project by promoting a watery and airy feeling through the metaphoric use of blue

mosaic finish on the floor surface predominantly. When it is looked at the same case in
117
Nishizawa’s Garden & House, the water element is not seen in the building as a

materialized entity. But, the inclusive approach of the architect ties the building to a scale

of the city. His building connects to this nature element, with a glimpse over the river

behind the high rise blocks of congested urban fabric. These exemplary evidences reveal

the high endeavor of the architects to achieve a connection with nature no matter the

context. It teaches designers by an avant-garde mode to imagine a variety of possibilities

in the creation of ‘spatial and natural experiences’ as is suggested in Kellert and

Calabrese’s Framework (2015).

However, it is crucial to remember the experimentalist character of these

architects, which is of vital importance to the topic researched here considering the live

character of nature and the buildings. From this point of view, the importance of the

experimental approach becomes prominent and relative. By analyzing these buildings in

accordance with the research variables (‘the three experiences and the twenty-four

attributes’ in the Biophilic Design Framework), it is seen that these buildings are the end

result of many experiments done and redone until they are refined and work properly.

This study aims to show empirical evidence of how the Biophilic Design Concept

works efficiently in different contexts (climate, culture, geography, and environment) and

in different forms of residential typology. Taliesin West sprawls horizontally on desert

geography of Sonoran, the Glass House perches on the edge of a top hill surrounded by

the remnants of the Brazilian rain forest, and the Garden & House rises on a tiny valley of

mountainous concrete blocks in Tokyo’s dense urban fabric; this could raise the

reliability of the Biophilia Hypothesis and be a didactical source for Architectural

discipline. Also this study aims to consolidate the background of future research inspired
118
by nature and human relationships and the place of architecture in between, bringing a

different array of methods and disciplines together. When the cross-disciplinary

characteristics of the issue are considered, it is an inviting and open field of exploration.

And, when the unresolved questions relating to life and creatures can be answered with

stronger measures and more tangible outcomes, the change in haphazardly regulated or

unregulated buildings and cities would move in a positive direction with faster

momentum.

Perhaps these three buildings might be considered as the epigraphs to the

Hypothesis of Biophilia, metamorphosing the built environment to show how nature turns

into architecture. Future studies, and technological advances are needed to address

climate conditions and produce building techniques that push the existing parameters of

the building envelope to an unimaginable standard, which is necessary in order to

dissolve the boundaries between humans and nature. Future studies in health, economy,

culture and social domains will create a brighter future for humanity and for the Earth.

119
Table 2.1.

Principles of Biophilic Design.

Retrieved from The Practice of Biophilic Design, (pp. 6-7), by S. Kellert, & E. Calabrese,

2015, www.biophilic-design.com

Principles of Biophilic Design (Kellert & Calabrese, 2015, pp. 6-7).

“Biophilic design requires repeated and sustained engagement with nature.
Biophilic design focuses on human adaptations to the natural world that over
evolutionary time have advanced people’s health, fitness and wellbeing.
Biophilic design encourages an emotional attachment to particular settings and places.
Biophilic design promotes positive interactions between people and nature that
encourage an expanded sense of relationship and responsibility for the human and
natural communities.
Biophilic design promotes positive interactions between people and nature that
encourage an expanded sense of relationship and responsibility for the human and
natural communities.
Biophilic design encourages mutual reinforcing, interconnected, and integrated
architectural solutions.”

120
Table 2.2.

The Framework: Experiences and Attributes of Biophilic Design.

Retrieved from The Practice of Biophilic Design, (p. 10), by S. Kellert, & E. Calabrese,

2015, www.biophilic-design.com

Biophilic Design Framework: Experiences and Attributes of Biophilic Design

Direct Experience of Indirect Experience of Experience of Space and
Nature Nature Place
Light Images of nature Prospect and refuge
Air Natural materials Organized complexity
Water Natural colors Integration of parts to
wholes
Plants Simulating natural light Transitional spaces
and air
Animals Naturalistic shapes and Mobility and wayfinding
forms
Weather Evoking nature Cultural and ecological
attachment to place
Natural landscapes and Information richness
ecosystems
Fire Age, change, and the
patina of time
Natural geometries
Biomimicry

121
Table 3.1.

Case Study Structure compares the project sites and research variables.

Variables Case Study Sites

Taliesin West Glass House Garden & House
(1937-1959) (1950-1951) (2006-2011)
Direct Experience of
Nature
Light
Air
Water
Plants
Animals
Weather
Natural landscapes and
ecosystems
Fire
Indirect Experience of
Nature
Images of nature
Natural materials
Natural colors
Simulating natural light
and air
Naturalistic shapes and
forms
Evoking nature
Information richness
Age, change, and the
patina of time
Natural geometries
Biomimicry
Experience of Space and
Place
Prospect and refuge
Organized complexity
Integration of parts to
wholes
Transitional spaces
Mobility and wayfinding
Cultural and ecological
attachment to place

122
 Conceptual framework of the study

Context: desert

Taliesin
West
Frank Llyod
Wright

The
Biophilia
Hypothesis
&
Biophilic
Design
Glass Garden &
House House
Lina Bo Ryue
Bardi Nishizawa
Context: rain Context: dense
forest remnants urban fabric

Figure 1.1. The connexion of case studies, their context and Biophilia.

123
 Figure2.1. Physiological stress recovery rates (changes in pulse transit time

(PTT)) measured in natural and urban environments.

Reprinted from “Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban

environments,” by R. S Ulrich, R. F. Simons, B. D. Losito, E. Fiorito, M. A. Miles, and

M. Zelson, 1991,

Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11(3), pp. 201-230. doi:10.1016/S0272-

4944(05)80184-7.

Copyright 1991 by R. S Ulrich, R. F. Simons, B. D. Losito, E. Fiorito, M. A.

Miles, and M. Zelson.

124
 Figure 3.1. The site context, Taliesin West. Scottsdale, Arizona, U.S.A.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

125
 Figure 3.2. The site context, Glass House. Morumbi, São Paulo, Brazil, 1951.

Reprinted from

Lina Bo Bardi (p. 80), by L. B. Bardi, M. C. Ferrraz, & Instituto Lina Bo e P.M.

Bardi, 1994, Milano: Charta.

Copyright 1994 by Edizioni Charta, Milano, and Instituto Lina Bo e P.M. Bardi,

São Paulo.

126
 Figure 3.3. The Glass House in 1951. Reprinted from

Lina Bo Bardi: Brasils alternative path to modernism [...publ. in conjunction with the

exhibition Lina Bo Bardi. Brasils alternative path to modernism at the

Architekturmuseum der TU München in the Pinakothek der Moderne; November 13,

2014 - February 22, 2015] (p. 201), by A. Lepik, R. L. S. Anelli, &

Architekturmuseum.<München>., & Ausstellung Lina Bo Bardi 100. Brasiliens

Alternativer Weg in die Moderne, (Lina Bo Bardi 100.), 2014, Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz.

Copyright 2014 by Hatje Cantz.

127
 Figure 3.4. The site context, Garden & House, Tokyo, Japan, 2011.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa,

In ArchEyes, December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

128
 Figure 4.1. a. Entrance of Taliesin West; Taliesin Fellowship logo – Whirling

Arrow – by Frank Lloyd Wright. Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

129
 Figure 4.1. b. Ancient Hohokam petroglyph found on Taliesin West site context.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

130
 Figure 4.2. A view from the prow garden: The design process of Taliesin West is

dictated by the inspiring information richness found in nature.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

131
Figure 4.3. Conceptual metaphor of Wright: the desert ‘sea’.

132
 Figure 4.4. Taliesin West echoes the naturalistic shapes and forms in the evoking

nature of desert environment: Expansiveness of the transitional spaces, and mountains in

the background. Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

133
 Figure 4.5. Mysterious mobility and wayfinding in Taliesin West: The little

secluded focus gardens interspersed between building volumes.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

134
 Figure 4.6. A direct experience of nature at immediate and distant; Wright

compromises with the desert context. Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

135
 Figure 4.7. The main axis of the Taliesin West; meaningful experience of space

and place achieved through the integration of parts to wholes.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

136
 Figure 4.8. Repeating crossbeams above the main axis create clear, discernable,

and accentuated transitional space, and provide a connection and coherence as referred

in organized complexity ‘attribution’ of biophilic space and place experience.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

137
 Figure 4.9. The indirect experience of nature is also sustained through natural

materials in TaliesinWest. Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

138
 Figure 4.10. The Desert Masonry discovered in Wright’s lab, Taliesin West;

while the architect was experimenting with the techniques of using native materials.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

139
 Figure 4.11. The walls indented with stretched thin lines as they exist on canyon

walls naturally. Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

140
 Figure 4.12. “In all this astounding desert there is not one hard undotted line to be

seen” (Wright, Lucas, & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993).

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

141
 Figure 4.13. The natural light assists the work environments in Taliesin West:

Wright’s Office. Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

142
 Figure 4.14. The Garden Room; access of natural light is a prominent ‘attribute’

for the direct experience of nature. Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

143
 Figure 4.15. Taliesin West is “a view over the rim of the world.” (Wright, Lucas,

& Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1993, p. 13).

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

144
 Figure 4.16.a.Wright’s Living Quarter’s operable doors apply the biophilic

experience of space and place by the direct experience of nature on the site.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

145
 Figure 4.16.b. Wright’s Living Quarter’s glass doors.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

146
 Figure 4.16.c. Top lights at the Wright’s Private Living Room.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

147
 Figure 4.16.d. Top lights at the Garden Room.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

148
 Figure 4.17. Wright’s Office; the architect opens the Corner of Room.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

149
 Figure 4.18. The Drafting Studio is in touch with the natural surroundings.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

150
 Figure 4.19. The Dining Room and breezeway adjacent to the Drafting studio.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

151
 Figure 4.20. Refuge space at the Garden Room.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

152
 Figure 4.21. Prospect ‘attribute’ in the Garden Room.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

153
 Figure 4.22. The Garden Room; fire as a social and natural element.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

154
 Figure 4.23. A prospect view towards the garden and Wrights’ Private Living

Quarter adjacent to Garden Room. Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

155
 Figure 4.24. Kiva Theater exposes natural beauty and ‘experiences’ through the

fire element and tactile of the materials. Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

156
 Figure 4.25. The volume of the Cabaret Theater was developed in a hexagonal

form for an acoustical solution. Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

157
 Figure 4.26. Fireplace at the Cabaret.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

158
 Figure 4.27. The Music Pavilion at Taliesin West.

Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

159
 Figure 4.28. The Music Pavilion’s concrete seating rows rise on the natural

incline of topography. Image by Pinar Orman, July, 2017.

160
 Figure 4.29. Glass House is a ‘harmonious fusion’ of architecture and nature.

Reprinted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi,

In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

161
 Figure 4.30. Glass House reflects a synthesis of modern and vernacular from the

different stylized front and back façades.

Reprinted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi,

In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

162
 Figure 4.31. The building entry opens up to the lifted main floor at center of the

house.

Reprinted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi,

In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

163
 Figure 4.32. The Glass House provides uninterrupted views towards the natural

surroundings.

Reprinted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi,

In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

164
 Figure 4.33. Tree and staircases’ atmospheric features guide the project structure

and orientation while creating life in architecture.

Reprinted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi,

In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

165
 Figure 4.34. Geometric form of the house and natural irregularity of the landscape

conjunct in a continuous flow.

Reprinted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi,

In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

166
 Figure 4.35. The elevated atrium of the Glass House reveals the “airborne

architecture” as a way of liberating houses.

Reprinted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi,

In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

167
 Figure 4.36. The Glass House has been ‘like a stage for a display of natural

phenomena’.

Reprinted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi,

In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

168
 Figure 4.37. The free plan of the main floor develops around a tree, which is

enclosed by the glass atrium.

Reprinted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi,

In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

169
 Figure 4.38. A plain white wall at the right side of entrance with small disguised

doors screens the privacy of everyday life in the kitchen, bedrooms and service areas.

Reprinted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi,

In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

170
 Figure 4.39. Garden & House project displays 21st century’s urban conditions and

its sociocultural formative structures.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa,

In ArchEyes, December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

171
 Figure 4.40. The green façade of Garden & House proposes an open life style.

Reprinted from “Jardin y casa = Garden & House, 2006-2011, (Japon/Japan): [Office of

Ryue Nishizawa],” 2015-01-01, AV Monografias, AV Monographs, 171-172, p.

175. Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by AV Monografias, AV Monographs.

172
 Figure 4.41. The Garden & House project manifests its own identical nature

integrated identity, and embraces being part of everyday.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa,

In ArchEyes, December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

173
 Figure 4.42. Nature of industrial materials is an abstract way to foster the

relations with nature in the built environment.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa,

In ArchEyes, December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

174
 Figure 4.43. The unique architectural promenade of the house is set by a steel

custom made white painted spiral staircase.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa,

In ArchEyes, December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

175
 Figure 4.44. The tiny bedroom on the first floor of Garden & House.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa,

In ArchEyes, December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

176
 Figure 4.45. The outdoor space also used for business meetings in Garden &

House.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa,

In ArchEyes, December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

177
 Figure 4.46. “A layer of earth finishes” the second floor with a concrete bench

and planters in Garden & House.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa,

In ArchEyes, December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

178
 Figure 4.47. The bathroom in the second floor of Garden & House. Reprinted

from “Jardin y casa = Garden & House, 2006-2011, (Japon/Japan): [Office of Ryue

Nishizawa],” 2015-01-01, AV Monografias, AV Monographs, 171-172, p. 181.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by AV Monografias, AV Monographs.

179
 Figure 4.48.a. The third floor accommodates a bedroom with a small office space

in Garden & House.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa,

In ArchEyes, December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

180
 Figure 4.48.b. The third floor; a small office in the balcony enclosed by a

concrete planter and circular Plexiglas railing.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa,

In ArchEyes, December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

181
 Figure 4.49. A central focal point – the white painted steel staircase – links each

sequential layer to the whole, as a main transitional space in Garden & House.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa,

In ArchEyes, December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

182
 REFERENCES

Chapter 1, 2, & 3

Almusaed, A. (2011). Biophilic and bioclimatic architecture: Analytical therapy for the
next generation of passive sustainable architecture. London [u.a.]: Springer.

Beatley, T., & Newman, P. (2013). Biophilic Cities Are Sustainable, Resilient Cities.
Sustainability, 5(8), 3328-3345. doi:10.3390/su5083328

Beatley, T. (2011). Biophilic cities: Integrating nature into urban design and planning.
Washington, DC: Island Press.

Bratman, G. N., Hamilton, J. P., & Daily, G. C. (2012). The impacts of nature experience
on human cognitive function and mental health. Annals of the New York Academy
of Sciences,1249(1), 118-136. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06400.x

Bringslimark, T., Hartig, T., & Patil, G. G. (2007). Psychological benefits of indoor
plants in workplaces: Putting experimental results into context. HortScience,
42(3), 581-587.

Browning, W., Ryan, C., & Clancy, J. (2014). 14 Patterns of Biophilic Design. New
York: Terrapin Bright Green, LLC.

Burns, C. (August 1, 2011). Lina Bo Bardi, the artist’s architect. The Art Newspaper.
Retrieved from http://www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/lina-bo-bardi-the-artists-
architect/24389

Campbell, S. (2010). Comparative Case Study. In A. J. Mills, G. Durepos, & E. Wiebe

(Eds.), Encyclopedia of Case Study Research (pp. 175-176). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications, Inc. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412957397
©2010 SAGE Publications, Inc.. All Rights Reserved.

Carranza, L. E., & Lara, F. L. (2014). Joe R. and Teresa Lozano Long Series in Latin
American and Latino Art and Culture: Modern Architecture in Latin America:
Art, Technology, and Utopia. Austin, US: University of Texas Press. Retrieved
from http://www.ebrary.com

Chang, C. Y., & Chen, P. K. (2005). Human response to window views and indoor plants
in the workplace. HortScience, 40(5), 1354-1359.

Crawford, C., & Krebs, D. (1997). Handbook of evolutionary psychology: Ideas, issues,
and applications. Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

183
Donovan, G.H., D.T. Butry, Y.L. Michael, J.P. Prestemon, A.M. Liebhold, D. Gatziolis,
and M.Y. Mao. (2013). The Relationship Between Trees and Human Health:
Evidence from the Spread of the Emerald Ash Borer. American Journal of
Preventive Medicine 44(2), 139-145.

Eaton, S. B., Konner, M., & Shostak, M. (April 01, 1988). Stone agers in the fast lane:
Chronic degenerative diseases in evolutionary perspective. The American Journal
of Medicine, 84, 4, 739-749. doi:10.1016/0002-9343(88)90113-1

Fjeld, T. (2000). The effect of interior planting on health and discomfort among workers
and school children. HortTechnology, 10(1), 46-52.

Fromm, E. (1973). The Anatomy of human destructiveness. Greenwich: Faucett

Publications, Inc.

Gerlach-Spriggs, N., Kaufman, R. E., & Warner, S. B. (1998). Restorative gardens: The
healing landscape. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Glacken, C. J. (1967). Traces on the Rhodian shore: Nature and culture in Western
thought from ancient times to the end of the eighteenth century. Berkeley:
University of California Press.

Griffin, C. (2004). An Introduction to Biophilia and the Built Environment. RMI

Solutions.

Grinde, B. (December 01, 2002). Happiness in the Perspective of Evolutionary

Psychology. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 4, 331-354.
doi:10.1023/A:1021894227295

Grinde, B., & Patil, G. G. (2009). Biophilia: Does visual contact with nature impact on
health and well-being? International Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 6(9), 2332–2343. http://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph6092332

Hartig, T. (2004). Restorative Environments. Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 273-

279. doi:10.1016/b0-12-657410-3/00821-7

Health Council of the Netherlands and Dutch Advisory Council for Research on Spatial
Planning, Nature and the Environment. Nature and Health. The influence of
nature on social, psychological and physical well-being. The Hague: Health
Council of the Netherlands and RMNO, 2004; publication no. 2004/09E; RMNO
publication nr A02ae.

Heathcote, E. (2014, Mar 15). A latin riposte to le corbusier. Financial Times. Retrieved
from

184
 http://login.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1
51580270?accountid=4485

Heerwagen, J., & Hase, B. (2001). Building Biophilia: Connecting People to Nature in
Building Design US Green Building Council.

Heerwagen, J. H., & Gregory, B. (2008). Biophilia and Sensory Aesthetics. In S.R.
Kellert, J. Heerwagen & M. Mador (Eds.), Biophilic design: the theory, science,
and practice of bringing buildings to life (pp. xiv, 385 pages, 332 pages of plates).
Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.

Hickman, C. (2013). ‘To brighten the aspect of our streets and increase the health and
enjoyment of our city: The National Health Society and urban green space in late-
nineteenth century London. Landscape and Urban Planning, 118, 112-119.
doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.09.007

Interface Europe, L. (2014). EMEA (Europe, Middle East, and Africa) Human Spaces
Report: Biophilic Design in the Workplace.

Interface Europe, L. (2015). Human Spaces Report: The Global Impact of Biophilic
Design.

Interface Global. Retrieved from www.interfaceglobal.com,

www.interfacereconnect.com & www.humanspaces.com

Irons, W. (January 01, 1998). Adaptively Relevant Environments Versus the

Environment of Evolutionary Adaptedness. Evolutionary Anthropology, 6, 6, 194-
204. doi:10.1002/(sici)1520-6505(1998)6:6<194::aid-evan2>3.0.co;2-b

Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework.

Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169-182. doi:10.1016/0272-
4944(95)90001-2

Katcher, Aaron (2002). "Animals in Therapeutic Education: Guides into the Liminal
State". In Kahn, Peter H.; Kellert, Stephen R. Children and Nature:
Psychological, Sociocultural, and Evolutionary Investigations. MIT Press.ISBN
0-262-11267-1. Retrieved January 30, 2013.

Kellert, S. R., & Wilson, E. O. (1993). The Biophilia hypothesis. Washington, D.C:
Island Press.

185
Kellert, S. R. (1997). Kinship to mastery: Biophilia in human evolution and development.
Washington, D.C.: Island Press/Shearwater Books.

Kellert, S. R. (2005;2012). Building for Life Designing and Understanding the Human-
Nature Connection. Washington DC: Island Press.

Kellert, S. R., Heerwagen, J. H., & Mador, M. L. (2008). Biophilic design: the theory,
science, and practice of bringing buildings to life. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.

Kellert, S. and Calabrese, E. (2015). The Practice of Biophilic Design. www.biophilic-

design.com

Kopec, D. A. (2006). Environmental psychology for design. New York: Fairchild Books.

Li, Q., M. Kobayashi, H. Inagaki, Y. Hirata, Y.J. Li, K. Hirata, T. Shimizu, H. Suzuki,
M. Katsumata, Y. Wakayama, T. Kawada, T. Ohira, N. Matsui, and T. Kagawa.
2010. A Day Trip to a Forest Park Increases Human Natural Killer Activity and
the Expression of Anti-cancer Proteins in Male Subjects. Journal of Biological
Regulators and Homeostatic Agents 24(2), 157-166.

Lidwell, W., Holden, K., & Butler, J. (2003). Universal principles of design. Gloucester,
MA: Rockport.

Lind, C. (1994). Frank Lloyd Wright's life and homes. San Francisco: Pomegranate
Artbooks.

Lohr, V. I., Pearson-Mims, C. H., & Goodwin, G. K. (January 01, 1996). Interior Plants
May Improve Worker Productivity and Reduce Stress in a Windowless
Environment. Journal of Environmental Horticulture, 14, 2, 97.

Louv, R. (2008). Last child in the woods: saving our children from nature-deficit
disorder. New York, NY: Algonquin Books.

MAKES, N. I. M., & SENSE, F. (2012). THE ECONOMICS OF BIOPHILIA.

Manaker, G. H. (1996). Interior plantscapes: Installation, maintenance, and

management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

McVay, S. (1993). Prelude: "A siamese connexion with a plurality of other mortals", InS.
R. Kellert & E. O. Wilson (Eds.), The Biophilia Hypothesis (pp. 3-
19).Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Morita, E., Fukuda, S., Nagano, J., Hamajima, N., Yamamoto, H., Iwai, Y., ... Shirakawa,
T. (January 01, 2007). Psychological effects of forest environments on healthy

186
 adults: Shinrin-yoku (forest-air bathing, walking) as a possible method of stress
reduction. Public Health, 121(1), 54-63. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2006.05.024

Nishizawa, R. (2013, May). Garden & House: [Tokyo], Japan, 2011. A & U:
Architecture& Urbanism, 512(5), 16-27.

Ohtsuka, Y., Yabunaka, N., & Takayama, S. (1998). Shinrin-yoku (forest-air bathing and
walking) effectively decreases blood glucose levels in diabetic patients.
International Journal of Biometeorology, 41(3), 125-127.
doi:10.1007/s004840050064

Olmsted, F. L. (1865). The value and care of parks. Report to the Congress of the State of
California. [Reprinted in R. Nash (ed.) (1976). The American Environment.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, pp 18-24.]

Park, B. J., Tsunetsugu, Y., Kasetani, T., Kagawa, T., & Miyazaki, Y. (January 01,
2010). The physiological effects of Shinrin-yoku (taking in the forest atmosphere
or forest bathing): evidence from field experiments in 24 forests across Japan.
Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, 15, 1, 18-26.
doi:10.1007/s12199-009-0086-9

Richardson, E. A., & Mitchell, R. (2010). Gender differences in relationships between

urban green space and health in the United Kingdom. Social Science & Medicine,
71(3), 568-575. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.04.015

Rogers, K. (2016, May 26). Biophilia Hypothesis. In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved

September 20, 2016 from
https://wwwbritannicacom.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/science/biophiliahypothesis?anch
or=ref1090191

Ryan, C. O., Browning, W. D., Clancy, J. O., Andrews, S. L., & Kallianpurkar, N. B.
(January 01, 2014). Biophilic design patterns: Emerging nature-based parameters
for health and well-being in the built environment. Archnet-ijar, 8, 2, 62-76.

Schröpfer, T., Chan, H., & Christiaanse, K. (2016). Dense green : Innovative building
types for sustainable urban architecture.

Spirn, A. W., Peatross, C. F., Sweeney, R. L., De, L. D. G., Centre canadien
d'architecture., Library of Congress., & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation. (1996).
Frank Lloyd Wright: Designs for an American landscape, 1922-1932. New York:
Harry N. Abrams in association with the Canadian Centre for Architecture, the
Library of Congress, and the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation.

187
Tamosiunas, A., R. Grazulevicience, D. Luksiene, et al. (2014). Accessibility and Use of
Urban Green Spaces, and Cardiovascular Health: Findings from a Kaunas Cohort
Study. Environmental Health 13, 1-20.

Taylor, A. F., & Kuo, F. E. (2009). Children With Attention Deficits Concentrate Better
After Walk in the Park. Journal of Attention Disorders, 12(5), 402-409.
doi:10.1177/1087054708323000

Terrapin Bright Green. (2012, 2014). Retrieved from

https://www.terrapinbrightgreen.com/

Tsunetsugu, Y., Lee, J., Park, B., Tyrväinen, L., Kagawa, T., & Miyazaki, Y. (2013).
Physiological and psychological effects of viewing urban forest landscapes
assessed by multiple measurements. Landscape and Urban Planning, 113, 90-93.
doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.01.01

Ulrich, R. S. (1979). Visual landscapes and psychological well‐being. Landscape

Research, 4(1), 17-23. doi:10.1080/01426397908705892

Ulrich, R. (1984). View through a window may influence recovery from surgery.
Science, 224(4647), 420-421. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/stable/1692984

Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991).
Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 11(3), 201-230. doi:10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80184-7

Verderber, S. (1986). Dimensions Of person-Window Transactions in the Hospital

Environment. Environment and Behavior, 18(4), 450-466.
doi:10.1177/0013916586184002

Weintraub, A., & Hess, A. (2010). Casa modernista: A history of the Brazil modern
house. New York: Rizzoli.

Wilson, A. (2006). Biophilia that Connect People with Nature. Environmental Building
News, 15. Retrieved from http://www2.buildinggreen.com/article/biophilia-
practice-buildings-connect-people-nature

Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia: the human bond with other species. Cambridge, Mass. :
Harvard University Press.

Wilson, E. O. (2008). The Nature of Human Nature. In Kellert, S. R., Heerwagen, J., &
Mador, M. (Eds), Elements of biophilic design: The theory, science, and practice
of bringing buildings to life (pp. 21-25). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

188
Wolf, K.L., S. Krueger, and M.A. Rozance. 2014. Stress, Wellness & Physiology - A
Literature Review. In: Green Cities: Good Health
(www.greenhealth.washington.edu). College of the Environment, University of
Washington.

189
 Chapter 4

Taliesin West, Phoenix, U.S.A. (1937-1959)

Hildebrand, G. (2008). Biophilic Architectural Space. In S. R. Kellert, J. H. Heerwagen,

& M. L. Mador (Eds.), Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science, and Practice of
Bringing Buildings to Life (pp. 263-276). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Spirn, A. W., Peatross, C. F., Sweeney, R. L., De, L. D. G., Centre canadien
d'architecture., Library of Congress., & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation. (1996).
Frank Lloyd Wright: Designs for an American landscape, 1922-1932. New York:
Harry N. Abrams in association with the Canadian Centre for Architecture, the
Library of Congress, and the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation.

Rosenfield, K. (2015, Jan 09). Taliesin West Reconstructed as Largest Frank Lloyd
Wright LEGO® Model. ArchDaily. Accessed 21 Aug 2017. Retrieved from
http://www.archdaily.com/585638/taliesin-west-reconstructed-as-largest-frank-lloyd-
wright-lego-r-model/

Wright, F. L. (1943). An autobiography. New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce.

Wright, F. L. (1939). An organic architecture: The architecture of democracy. London:

Lund Humphries.

Wright, F. L., Futagawa, Y., Tanigawa, M., & Taliesin West (Scottsdale, Ariz.). (1972).
Taliesin East, Spring Green, Wisconsin, 1925- Taliesin West, Paradise Valley,
Arizona, 1938-: Scottsdale, Ariz. / edited and photographed by Yukio Futagawa ;
text by Masami Tanigawa. Tokyo: A.D.A. EDITA.

Wright, F. L., Lucas, S. A., & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation. (1993). Taliesin West: An
interpretive guide : in the realm of ideas. Scottsdale, AZ: Frank Lloyd Wright
Foundation.

Wright, F. L., Pfeiffer, B. B., & Futagawa, Y. (1989). Frank Lloyd Wright: selected
houses. Tokyo: A.D.A. EDITA.

190
 Glass House, São Paulo, Brazil (1950-1951)

Bardi, L. B., Pagani, C. (1940). Casa sul mare di Sicilia. Domus, 152, pp. 30-35.

Bo, L. & Pagani, C. “L’acquario in casa”. In: Lo Stile, no. 10, Oct 1941, pp. 24 and 25.

Bardi, L. B., Pagani, C. (1943). Un giardino disegnato da Bo e Pagani. Domus, 191, pp.
464-71.

Bardi, L. B., “Architettura e Natura. La Casa nel paesaggio”. In: Domus, no. 191,
November 1943, pp. 464-471.

Bo, L. & Pagani, C. (eds.). “Sensibilita dei materiali”. In: Domus, no. 201, Sept. 1944,
pp. 314-319.

Bardi, L. B., Pagani, C (eds.). (1944, March). Case sui trampoli. Domus, 195, pp. 86-87.
Le, C., & Etchells, F. (1927). [Vers une architecture.] Towards a New
Architecture ... Translated from the thirteenth French edition with an introduction
by Frederick Etchells. John Rodker: London. (1923).

Bardi, L.B. (1951). Primeiro: escolas. Habitat, 04. São Paulo.

Bardi, L. B., “Residência no Morumbi,” Habitat 10 (January–March 1953).

Bardi, L. B., (1953). Entre o ceu e a vegetação pousa a casa de dois artistas. Casa e
Jardim, 1, pp. 8-13.

Bardi, L. B. Arquitetura como movimento. Nota sobre sintese das artes, (manuscript of
her lecture on Dance and Architecture). Salvador, 1958.

Bardi, L. B., (27/09/1958). Arquitetura e Natureza ou Natureza e Arquitetura.

(Manuscript from the conference held during the Second Architecture Week of the
Casa da França). Lina Bo & P.M. Bardi Institute Archive.

Bardi, L. B. Quoted in. “Na simplicidade a beleza do projeto”. In: Dirigente Construtor,
vol. XXIII, no. 2, February 1987, pp. 34-37.

Bardi, L. B. “Terapi Intensiva”. In: AU Arquitetura Urbanismo, no. 18, Casa do Benin,
June-July 1988, p. 37.

Bardi, L. B., Carvalho, F. M., & Museu de Arte de São Paulo Assis Chateaubriand.
(1994). Lina Bo Bardi: [mostra, Museu de Arte de São Paulo Assis
Chateaubriand, agosto - settembre 1993 ...]. Milano: Ed. Charta.

191
Bardi, L. B., & Instituto Lina Bo e P.M. Bardi. (1994). Lina Bo Bardi. São Paulo:
Instituto Lina Bo e P. M. Bardi.

Bardi, L. B. (2014). Lina Bo Bardi: The theory of architectural practice. (C. Veikos,
Trans.). London, UK: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. (Original work
published 1957)

Bardi, L. B., Lepik, A., Anelli, R., & Bader, V. S. (2014). Lina Bo Bardi 100: Brazil's
alternative path to modernism. Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz.

Lepik, A., Anelli, R. L. S., Architekturmuseum.<München>., & Ausstellung Lina Bo

Bardi 100. Brasiliens Alternativer Weg in die Moderne. (2014). Lina Bo Bardi:
Brasils alternative path to modernism [...publ. in conjunction with the exhibition
Lina Bo Bardi. Brasils alternative path to modernism at the Architekturmuseum
der TU München in the Pinakothek der Moderne; November 13, 2014 – February
22, 2015]. (Lina Bo Bardi 100.) Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz.

Lina Bo Bardi – ‘House in Morumbi’, in Habitat 10, January–March 1953, translated in

Lina Bo Bardi, edited by Brett Steele, translated by Anthony Doyle and Pamela
Johnston – Architecture Words 12: Stones Against Diamonds, Architectural
Association, London, 2013, pp. 43–4.

Lina Bo Bardi, edited by Brett Steele, translated by Anthony Doyle and Pamela Johnston
– Architecture Words 12: Stones Against Diamonds, Architectural Association,
London, 2013.

Erickson, M. H., & Rossi, E. L. (1979). Hypnotherapy, an exploratory casebook. New

York: Irvington.

Ferraz, M. C., & Instituto Lina Bo e P. M. Bardi (São Paulo). (1993). Lina Bo Bardi.
Milano: Charta.

"Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi," in ArchEyes, August 15, 2016. Retrieved from
http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Japanese and Brazilian daily approach to MAM in São Paulo. In UOL, n.d., Retrieved
July 10, 2017, from
https://entretenimento.uol.com.br/album/quando_vidas_se_tornam_forma_mam_a
lbum.htm#fotoNav=2.

Lima, Z. R. M. A., Bergdoll, B., & Bardi, L. B. (2013). Lina Bo Bardi. New Haven: Yale
University Press.

Markus, T. A., & Cameron, D. (2002). The words between the spaces: Buildings and
language. London: Routledge.

192
Miotto, L., Nicolini, S. (1998). “Aprirsi all’ accadimento”. In: Universale di architettura.
Collana diretta da Bruno Zevi. Testo & Immagine, Turin, p. 18.

Nute, K. (1993). Frank Lloyd Wright and Japan: The role of traditional Japanese art and
architecture in the work of Frank Lloyd Wright. London: Chapman & Hall.

Oliveira, O. F., Quetglas, P., & Escola Tècnica Superior d'Arquitectura de Barcelona.
(2000). Sutis substâncias da arquitectura de Lina Bo Bardi.

Oliveira, O. D. (2006). Subtle substances: the architecture of Lina Bo Bardi. Barcelona:

Gustavo Gili.

Ponti, G. (1953, February). “La Casa de Vidro”. In: Domus, no. 279, pp. 19-26.

Scott, G. (1914). The architecture of humanism: A study in the history of taste. London:
Constable and Company, Ltd.

Statement made by Lina Bo Bardi, in Moreno, L. K. 1987. Quoted in: Campello, Ma de

F. de M. B. Lina Bo Bardi: as moradas da alma. (Masters thesis). São Carlos
Engineering School/University of São Paulo, 1997, p. 160.

Unwin, S. (2015). Twenty-five buildings every architect should understand.

Vitruvius, P., Cesariano, C., & Krinsky, C. H. (1969). De architectura. München: Fink.

Volckers, H., & Farenholtz, A. (2014). Opening remarks of the Kulturstiftung des Bundes
(German Federal Cultural Foundation). In A. Lepik & V. S. Bader (Eds.),
Architekturmuseum.<München>., & Ausstellung Lina BoBardi 100. Brasiliens
Alternativer Weg in die Moderne. (2014). Lina Bo Bardi: Brasils alternative path
to modernism [...publ. in conjunction with the exhibition Lina Bo Bardi. Brasils
alternative path to modernism at the Architekturmuseum der TU München in the
Pinakothek der Moderne; November 13, 2014 – February 22, 2015]. (Lina Bo
Bardi 100.) (p.15). Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz.

Weintraub, A., & Hess, A. (2010). Casa modernista: A history of the Brazil modern
house. New York: Rizzoli.

Wisnik, G. (2014). A history of Lina Bo Bardi’s critical reception. In L. B. Bardi, A.

Lepik, R. Anelli & V. S. Bader (Eds.), Lina Bo Bardi 100: Brazil's alternative
path to modernism (pp. 35-48). Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz.

193
 Garden & House, Tokyo, Japan (2006-2011)

Allen, S. (1999). From object to field: Field conditions in architecture and urbanism. In
Points + lines: Diagrams and projects for the city (1st ed.). (pp. 90-103). New
York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

Blau, E. (2010). Inventing new hierarchies. In The Pritzker Architecture Prize: Kazuyo
Sejima & Ryue Nishizawa, 2010 Laureates, Essay. Retrieved from
http://www.pritzkerprize.com/2010/essay

Buntrock, D. (2010). Materials and meaning in contemporary Japanese architecture.

New York: Routledge.

Calvino, I. (1988). Six memos for the next millennium. Boston, MA: Harvard University
Press.

Echanove, M. (Interviewer) & Nishizawa, R. & Sejima, K. (Interviewee). (October, 5,

2008). Interview with Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue Nishizawa (SANAA) for EGG
Magazine [Taiwan], Tokyo August 8, 2007 [Interview transcript]. Retrieved from
http:// www.airoots.org/interview-with-kazuyo-sejima-ryue-nishizawa-sanaa-
tokyo-august-8-2007/.

Feireiss, K. (Ed.). (2006). Kazuyo Sejima + Ryue Nishizawa/SANAA: The Zollverein

School of Management and Design, Essen, Germany (p. 64). Munich, Berlin,
London, New York.

Fujimori, T. (2016). Magical spatial inversion. In Gadanho, P., Springstubb, P. (Eds.), A

Japanese constellation: Toyo Ito, SANAA, and beyond. (pp. 73-76). New York,
N.Y.

Gadanho, P., Springstubb, P., & Museum of Modern Art (New York, N.Y.). (2016). A
Japanese constellation: Toyo Ito, SANAA, and beyond.

"Garden & House / SANAA," in ArchEyes, December 27, 2015. Retrieved from
http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Igarashi, T. (2016). New Architecture after “History”. In Gadanho, P., Springstubb, P.

(Eds.), A Japanese constellation: Toyo Ito, SANAA, and beyond. (pp. 189-192).
New York, N.Y.

Jardin y casa = Garden & house, 2006-2011, (Japón / Japan): [Office of Ryue
Nishizawa]. (2015). AV monografías = AV monographs, (171), 174-181.

Kageyama, Y., Associated Press (2014, Aug 10). Japanese architects embracing tradition.
Journal Gazette, The (Fort Wayne, IN), p. 3H. . Retrieved from

194
 http://infoweb.newsbank.com/resources/doc/nb/news/14FABEC2D5B678C0?p=
AWNB

Kellert, S. and Calabrese, E. 2015. The Practice of Biophilic Design. www.biophilic-

design.com

Koshiro, H. (1995). The Wabi aesthetic through the ages. In N. G. Hume (Eds.),
Japanese aesthetics and culture: A reader (245-78). Albany: State University of
New York Press.

Lowry, G. D. (2016). Foreword. In Gadanho, P., Springstubb, P. (Eds.), A Japanese

constellation: Toyo Ito, SANAA, and beyond. (pp. 7). New York, N.Y.

Myerson, J., Bichard, J., & Bichard, J. (2010). New demographics new workspace.
Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu

Nishizawa, R. (2007). Ryue Nishizawa: garden & house, Tokyo, Japan. GA Houses, (98),
8-11.

Nishizawa, R., & Sejima, K. (2010). The Pritzker Architecture Prize Ceremony
Acceptance Speech. Retrieved from
http://www.pritzkerprize.com/2010/ceremony_speech1

Nishizawa, R. (2016). The Social Landscape of Architecture. In Gadanho, P.,

Springstubb, P. (Eds.), A Japanese constellation: Toyo Ito, SANAA, and beyond.
(pp. 139). New York, N.Y.

Nuijsink, C. (2012). Wild life [Tokyo, Japan]. Mark: Another Architecture, (37), 132-
141.

Obrist, H. U., Sejima, K., & Nishizawa, R. (2012). SANAA - Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue
Nishizawa, Hans Ulrich Obrist. Köln: König. pp. 63-72. (Interview first published
in 2009. In, SANAA; Serpentine Gallery Pavilion 2009. London: Serpentine
Gallery.)

Obrist, H. U., Sejima, K., & Nishizawa, R. (2012). People meet in architecture, 12th
International Architecture Exhibition, Venice Biennale, September 2010. In,
SANAA - Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue Nishizawa, Hans Ulrich Obrist. Köln: König.
pp. 83-103. (Interview first published in 2009. In, SANAA; Serpentine Gallery
Pavilion 2009. London: Serpentine Gallery.)

Oliveira, O. d. (2006). The architecture of Lina Bo Bardi: Subtle substances. Barcelona:

Editorial Gustavo Gili.

195
Palumbo, L. (2010). The Pritzker Architecture Prize: Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue Nishizawa,
2010 Laureates, Ceremony Speech. Retrieved from
http://www.pritzkerprize.com/2010/ceremony_speech2b

Ryue Nishizawa. (2007). GA houses, (100), 268-275.

Ryue Nishizawa, Garden & House: [Tokyo], Japan, 2011. (2013). A & U: architecture &
urbanism, (5), 16-27.

Steele, J., & MyiLibrary. (2017). Contemporary japanese architecture: Tracing the next
generation. New York, New York;London, [England];: Routledge.

The Pritzker Architecture Prize Jury Citation. (2010). Retrieved from

http://www.pritzkerprize.com/2010/jury

Igarashi, T., Onoda, Y., Kanada, M., & Goto, T. (2005). The alternative modern. Tokyo:
TN Probe.

Ito, T. (2012). A new architecture is possible only in the sea of consumption. In Chong,
D., Hayashi, M., Kajiya, K., & Sumitomo, F. (Eds.), A from postwar to
postmodern, Art in Japan 1945-1989: Primary documents. (M. Behr, Trans.). (pp.
358). New York, N.Y: Museum of Modern Art. Essay first published in 1989 as
“Shoni no umi ni hitarazu shite atarashii kenchiku wa nai,” in Shinkenchiku 64,
no. 11 (November 1989): 201-4.

Worrall, J. (2016). The deep field: Resolving a Japanese constellation. In Gadanho, P.,
Springstubb, P. (Eds.), A Japanese constellation: Toyo Ito, SANAA, and beyond.
(pp. 245-250). New York, N.Y.

Wright, F. L., Lucas, S. A., & Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation. (1993). Taliesin west: An
interpretive guide: In the realm of ideas. Scottsdale, AZ: Frank Lloyd Wright
Foundation.

Zancan, R. (2011). Soglie verticali a Tokyo: tre recenti progetti di Sou Fujimoto, Ryue
Nishizawa e Kazuyo Sejima interpretano in modo drammatico verticalità e
teatralità spaziale, per sfuggire così alle strettoie di una città notoriamente densa =
Tokyo's vertical thresholds: three new projects by Sou Fujimoto, Ryue Nashizawa
and Kazuyo Sejima make dramatic use of verticality and spatial theatrics to
escape the constrictions of a notoriously dense city. Domus, (953), 25-39.

196
 APPENDIX A

TALIESIN WEST, PHOENIX, U.S.A. (1937-1959)

197
 Figure A1. Taliesin West, plan. Reprinted from

Global Architecture: Frank Lloyd Wright, Taliesin East, Spring Green, Wisconsin. 1925 -

, Taliesin West, Paradise Valley, Arizona. 1938 - (pp. 44-45), edited and photographed by

Y. Futagawa, text by M. Tanigawa, 1972-1980, Tokyo: A.D.A. Edita.

Copyright 1977 by The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, and 1972-1980 by

A.D.A. EDITA Tokyo.

198
 Figure A2. Taliesin West, layout, 1993. Reprinted from

Taliesin West: an interpretive guide (pp. 24-25), by S. A. Lucas, 1993, Scottsdale, AZ:

The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation.

Copyright 1993 by The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation.

199
 Figure A3. Taliesin West, air-view perspective. Reprinted from

Global Architecture: Frank Lloyd Wright, Taliesin East, Spring Green, Wisconsin. 1925 -

, Taliesin West, Paradise Valley, Arizona. 1938 - (pp. 42-43), edited and photographed by

Y. Futagawa, text by M. Tanigawa, 1972-1980, Tokyo: A.D.A. Edita.

Copyright 1962 by The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, and 1972-1980 by

A.D.A. EDITA Tokyo.

200
 Figure A4. Taliesin West, concept elevations, 1937-38. Reprinted from

Global Architecture: Frank Lloyd Wright, Taliesin East, Spring Green, Wisconsin. 1925 -

, Taliesin West, Paradise Valley, Arizona. 1938 - (pp. 44-45), edited and photographed by

Y. Futagawa, text by M. Tanigawa, 1972-1980, Tokyo: A.D.A. Edita.

Copyright 1977 by The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, and 1972-1980 by

A.D.A. EDITA Tokyo.

201
 Figure A5. Taliesin West, LEGO® model. Adapted from

Taliesin West Reconstructed as Largest Frank Lloyd Wright LEGO® Model, by K.

Rosenfield, In ArchDaily, January 9, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://www.archdaily.com/585638/taliesin-west-reconstructed-as-largest-frank-

lloyd-wright-lego-r-model/

Copyright 2015 by Andrew Pielage Photography, and ArchDaily.

202
 APPENDIX B

GLASS HOUSE, SÃO PAULO, BRAZIL (1950-1951)

203
 Figure B1. Glass House, Context Layout: (1) Glass House, (2) Studio, (3)

Servant’s house, (4) Garage, (5) Pond.

Adapted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi, In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016,

Retrieved July 10, 2017, from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

204
 Figure B2. Glass House, ground floor plan.

Adapted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi, In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016,

Retrieved July 10, 2017, from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

205
 Figure B3. Glass House, upper floor plan: (1) Entrance, (2) Library, (3) Living

room, (4) Space, (5) Fireplace, (6) Dining room, (7) Bedroom, (8) Clothes closet, (9)

Kitchen, (10) Servant’s bedroom, (11) Servant’s living room, (12) Wardrobe, (13)

Veranda, (14) Patio.

Adapted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi, In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016,

Retrieved July 10, 2017, from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

206
 Figure B4. Glass House, section A.

Reprinted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi, In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016,

Retrieved July 10, 2017, from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

207
 Figure B5. Glass House, section B.

Reprinted from Glass House / Lina Bo Bardi, In ArchEyes, August 15, 2016,

Retrieved July 10, 2017, from http://archeyes.com/glass-house-lina-bo-bardi/.

Copyright 2016 by ArchEyes.

208
 Figure B6. Glass House Model by Lina Bo Bardi, made in 1951. Image disclosure

by Luigi Stavale. Reprinted

from Japanese and Brazilian daily approach to MAM in São Paulo,

In UOL, n.d., Retrieved July 10, 2017, from

https://entretenimento.uol.com.br/album/quando_vidas_se_tornam_forma_mam_a

lbum.htm#fotoNav=2.

Copyright by The São Paulo Museum of Modern Art (MAM).

209
 APPENDIX C

GARDEN & HOUSE, TOKYO, JAPAN (2006-2011)

210
 Figure C1. Garden & House, Context Layout.

Reprinted from “Jardin y casa = Garden & House, 2006-2011, (Japon/Japan): [Office of

Ryue Nishizawa],” 2015-01-01, AV Monografias, AV Monographs, 171-172, p.

174.

Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by AV Monografias, AV Monographs.

211
 Figure C2. Garden & House, floor plans: (1) Living, (2) Kitchen, (3) Dining, (4)

Bedroom, (5) Meeting room, (6) Bathroom, (7) Extra room.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa, In ArchEyes,

December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Ryue Nishizawa, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

212
 Figure C3. Garden & House, conceptual elevations.

Reprinted from Garden & House / SANAA, by R. Nishizawa,

In ArchEyes, December 27, 2015, Retrieved July 10, 2017,

from http://archeyes.com/sanaa-garden-house/.

Copyrights 2011 by Ryue Nishizawa, and 2015 by ArchEyes.

213
 Figure C4. Garden & House, section A.

Reprinted from “Jardin y casa = Garden & House, 2006-2011, (Japon/Japan): [Office of

Ryue Nishizawa],” 2015-01-01, AV Monografias, AV Monographs, 171-172, p.

176. Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by AV Monografias, AV Monographs.

214
 Figure C5. Garden & House, section B.

Reprinted from “Jardin y casa = Garden & House, 2006-2011, (Japon/Japan): [Office of

Ryue Nishizawa],” 2015-01-01, AV Monografias, AV Monographs, 171-172, p.

181. Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by AV Monografias, AV Monographs.

215
 Figure C6. Garden & House, physical model.

Reprinted from “Jardin y casa = Garden & House, 2006-2011, (Japon/Japan): [Office of

Ryue Nishizawa],” 2015-01-01, AV Monografias, AV Monographs, 171-172, p.

177. Copyrights 2011 by Iwan Baan, and 2015 by AV Monografias, AV Monographs.

216