Building Materials...

As I've mentioned, I enjoy church architecture.  If I could choose any corner of the architecture field, it would be designing churches, libraries, schools, community centers: useful multipurpose places where people gather.  These buildings enrich our lives, if you think about it.  They are also the kinds of buildings that are given a lot of free rein to be creative in design.  Sometimes this is a good thing, sometimes this is a bad thing.  I showed an example of wonderful church architecture before, St. Ignatius Chapel, now I will show an example of (I'll be kind) mediocre church architecture: the new Methodist church on 1st and Denny.  Understand that I am making no critique of the Methodist religion, or anything like that, I'm just really not a fan of this new building.  Most people, when driving down the street, probably don't pay too much attention to buildings, but when I drive down the street it is common to hear me exclaim things like, "oh my gosh, what IS that??" to which my husband, looks all over thinking I've just seen an alien.  In the case of this building, he was actually right there with me in thinking this was a strange sight.  Without further ado, here's the front of the building:

In fairness to this building, I actually took this photo from the more attractive corner of it.  Usually we are driving up the hill and see the West side first (you are looking at the SE corner) or just the flat South side.  I don't have much to say about this facade except that I really hate it. It looks like they wrapped the middle of this building in industrial-strength tin foil.  Just because Frank Gehry uses this kind of stuff, doesn't mean it's a good idea for everyone else.  What IS that dent in the middle of those panels?  What IS that little hat on top?  Why does the western end of that South facade look like a standard apartment building?  I could go on and on... It also doesn't say "church!" to me except for the giant cross made of industrial-looking I-beams, which looks like an after-thought made out of left-over materials. 
When a building catches my attention, I always like to see who designed it.  In the case of what I consider poor design, when I look up the firm, I have to admit that I usually think, "oohhh...that explains it."  This building was one of those cases.  I'm not a fan of this particular firm's style - just take a look at that giant pinkish skyscraper that the City of Seattle purchased from the First Hill side of it and maybe you'll get my point.  It has a nickname among local architects that I shall not repeat on this here little blog o' mine.
The good thing I can say for this particular building is that its East side is actually very nice.  I would even go so far as to say that I *like* it.  The stained glass window is quite lovely (if only it wasn't wrapped in that horrible tin foil stuff) and glows beautifully at night.  This is the NE corner of the building.  I think it's respectable - maybe not traditional for a church, but attractive and restrained.  It has a nice urban, but pedestrian-scale feel to it which is appropriate for its location.

I have not been inside the building.  I am going to guess that the chapel is lovely and gets fabulous morning light, which is perfect for a Sunday church service.
I think designing a church in such an urban setting would definitely be a challenge.  It is the blending of two very different feelings into one building (hustle/bustle naturally wants to fight with serene/calm).  In that regard, I think at least this back side of the building does that very well. 
So, if you live around here, drive by it and form your own opinion.  Feel free to let me know what you think.  I always like discussing these things.
A couple of parting shots of those lovely panels...that last photo makes it almost look legit.

Bottles of Light

Oh that I could take an architectural photo like this one.

On Thursday the boys and I made a little architectural pilgrimage to a building I had not visited since architecture school.  We were visiting a friend who happened to be at Seattle University for work for a couple of days and I decided since we were there, we would make a little detour.  Unfortunately the weather was wretched and we couldn't actually go inside the building due to a service in progress.  A lot of my pictures from the day are terrible due to the weather and having my children with me, so I have supplemented from the web.
On Seattle U's campus is a very famous building designed by a famous architect who actually went to my alma mater, the University of Washington, and believe me, none of the professors ever let us forget that during school.  The building is St. Ignatius Chapel and the architect is Steven Holl.  I don't love all of his stuff (for example, did not like his proposal for Ground Zero), but I am very fond of this little building.
I have a thing for church-architecture. It is a fascinating genre because architects are generally given more artistic freedom, yet the obvious religious purpose of the building provides some fairly intense constraints and challenges.  This creates the possibility for some serious elegance and grace (or unbelievable bad taste, as is the case of another church I intend to blog about in the future once I figure out how to get some decent pictures of it).  I could actually write quite a few blog posts on interesting churches I have visited, and I have not even been abroad to see the cathedrals of Europe.
Back to St. Ignatius.  It is fascinating!  As stated by Holl on SU's website:

Holl conceived of the chapel as "seven bottles of light in a stone box," with each bottle or vessel of light corresponding to a focal aspect of Catholic worship. Light passes through each bottle in a specific area of the building to define physical and spiritual spaces with pools of clear and colored light.

The outside of the building is what I will call tastefully-funky, but it completely serves the inside of the building.  It is truly a case of form following function.  That might be both a critique and a compliment.  I can't decide because as critical as some are of the exterior of the building, I like it.  It is very human-scaled and almost feels friendly as you walk by it.  The exterior is also very tactile - even the glass of the windows at eye-level appear to be dimensional and it is hard not to reach out and touch them - in fact, I did.  Nearly everything about this building feels unique and custom made for it.
While the interior truly is the highlight of the building's experience (as it should be with a church), there are many interesting details on the exterior of the building worth noting.  Here are a couple of them:

The front door hardware.

The front door.

My son next to one of the custom windows.

The interior of the church is filled with textured
pale walls washed with very delicate and indirect, colored light.  This is achieved through clear or translucent glass, oddly enough.  The windows are generally up high and hidden by a baffle that has a bright color of paint on the window-side of it.  The light shines through the window and bounces off of a colored wall, reflecting colored light onto very plain walls.  All of the windows are different shapes, at different levels and reflecting different colors.  The light changes inside the building based on both the time of day and the weather.

One of the baffles with a bright blue painted on the back.  I also love the pendant lighting.  You can imagine how this photo would look differently if taken at night.

The reflection of red has a powerful effect.

If you ever find yourself in the area (sort of where the Central District meets First hill meets Capitol Hill), take a walk past it (just north of Columbia off of 12th Avenue).
The building won an AIA award and the model permanently resides in New York City's MoMA.
For another great take on this building, go HERE.