Mies van der Rohe and the Battle with Farnsworth

Critics called Edith Farnsworth lovesick and spiteful when she filed suit against Mies van der Rohe. More than fifty years later, the glass-walled Farnsworth House still stirs controversy. Think of modernism in residential architecture, and the Farnsworth House will be on anyones list. Completed in 1951 for Dr. Edith Farnsworth, the Plano, Illinois glass house was being concocted by Mies van der Rohe at the same time his friend and colleague Philip Johnson was designing a glass house for his own use in Connecticut. It turns out that Johnson had the better client—Johnsons Glass House, completed in 1949, was architect-owned; Mies glass house had a very unhappy client. Mies van der Rohe Gets Sued: Dr. Edith Farnsworth was outraged. Something should be said and done about such architecture as this, she told House Beautiful magazine, or there will be no future for architecture. The target of Dr. Farnsworths fury was the architect of her house. Mies van der Rohe had built for her a house made almost entirely of glass. I thought you could animate a predetermined, classic form like this with your own presence. I wanted to do something meaningful, and all I got was this glib, false sophistication, Dr. Farnsworth complained. Mies van der Rohe and Edith Farnsworth had been friends. Gossips suspected that the prominent physician had fallen in love with her brilliant architect. Perhaps they had been romantically involved. Or, perhaps they had merely become enmeshed in the passionate activity of co-creation. Either way, Dr. Farnsworth was bitterly disappointed when the house was completed and the architect was no longer a presence in her life. Dr. Farnsworth took her disappointment to court, to newspapers, and eventually to the pages of House Beautiful magazine. The architectural debate mingled with 1950s cold war hysteria to create a public outcry so loud that even Frank Lloyd Wright joined in. Mies van der Rohe: Less is more.Edith Farnsworth: We know that less is not more. It is simply less! When Dr. Farnsworth asked Mies van der Rohe to design her weekend getaway, he drew upon ideas he had developed (but never built) for another family. The house he envisioned would be austere and abstract. Two rows of eight steel columns would support the floor and roof slabs. In between, the walls would be vast expanses of glass. Dr. Farnsworth approved the plans. She met with Mies often at the work site and followed the progress of the house. But four years later, when he handed her the keys and the bill, she was stunned. Costs had soared to $73,000—over budget by $33K. Heating bills were also exorbitant. Moreover, she said, the glass-and-steel structure was not livable. Mies van der Rohe was baffled by her complaints. Surely the doctor did not think that this house was designed for family living! Rather, the Farnsworth House was meant to be the pure expression of an idea. By reducing architecture to almost nothing, Mies had created the ultimate in objectivity and universality. The sheer, smooth, unornamented Farnsworth House embodied the highest ideals of the new, Utopian International Style. Mies took her to court to pay the bill. Dr. Farnsworth counter-sued, but her case did not stand up in court. She had, after all, approved the plans and supervised the construction. Seeking justice, and then revenge, she took her frustrations to the press. Press Reaction: In April 1953, House Beautiful magazine responded with a scathing editorial which attacked the work of Mies van der Rohe, Walter Gropius, Le Corbusier, and other followers of the International Style. The style was described as a Threat to the New America. The magazine insinuated that Communist ideals lurked behind the design of these grim and barren buildings. To add fuel to the fire, Frank Lloyd Wright joined in the debate. Wright had always opposed the bare bones architecture of the International School. But he was especially harsh in his attack when he joined in the House Beautiful debate. Why do I distrust and defy such internationalism as I do communism? Wright asked. Because both must by their nature do this very leveling in the name of civilization. According to Wright, promoters of the International Style were totalitarians. They were not wholesome people, he said. Farnsworths Vacation Retreat: Eventually, Dr. Farnsworth settled into the glass-and-steel house and begrudgingly used it as her vacation retreat until 1972. Mies creation was widely praised as a jewel, a crystal and a pure expression of an artistic vision. However, the doctor had every right to complain. The house was—and still is—riddled with problems. First of all, the building had bugs. Real ones. At night, the illuminated glass house turned into a lantern, drawing swarms of mosquitoes and moths. Dr. Farnsworth hired Chicago architect William E. Dunlap to design bronze-framed screens. Farnsworth sold the house in 1975 to Lord Peter Palumbo, who removed the screens and installed air conditioning—which also helped with the buildings ventilation problems. But some problems have proved to be unresolvable. The steel columns rust. They frequently need sanding and painting. The house sits near a stream. Severe flooding has caused damage that required extensive repairs. The house, which is now a museum, has been beautifully restored, but it requires ongoing care. Could Anyone Live in a Glass House? Its difficult to imagine Edith Farnsworth tolerating these conditions for more than twenty years. There must have been moments when she was tempted to throw stones at Mies perfect, glistening glass walls. Wouldnt you? We took a poll of our readers to find out. Out of 3234 total votes, most people agree that glass houses are...beautiful. Glass houses are beautiful 51% (1664) Glass houses are beautiful... but not comfortable 36% (1181) Glass houses are NOT beautiful, and not comfortable 9% (316) Glass houses are NOT beautiful... but comfortable enough 2% (73) Learn More: Sex and Real Estate, Reconsidered by Nora Wendl, archDaily, July 3, 2015Mies van der Rohe: A Critical Biography, New and Revised Edition by Franz Schulze and Edward Windhorst, University Of Chicago Press, 2014LEGO Architecture Farnsworth House

What Would Beowulf Do How Beowulf Is a Christ-Like Figure...

The contemplative question of â€Å"What would Jesus do?† has become a popular pragmatism in society today. There is an unwritten rule or sense of morality by which a properly functioning civilization may live. However, what method did early Anglo-Saxons use to remind themselves of what would be the proper thing to do in a situation? Even though they were a violent and warmongering culture as a whole, geared toward waging and winning war, they did have a moral code to honor. Anglo-Saxons prized the values, which they would have been learned by rote since childhood, including: courage and selflessness, honor, discipline and duty, hospitality, self-reliance, and perseverance. These principles of character are some of the main mores clearly†¦show more content†¦The characteristic of an unmitigated wickedness-- a ubiquitous evil presence which common man cannot easily see, but is eventually consumed by-- is clear in both accounts; in Beowulf’s case, he grapples wit h Grendel and defeats him by tearing his arm off, in Christ’s struggle against evil, He spiritually wrestles Satan during His forty days and forty nights in the desert where he fasted, prayed, and eventually conquered Lucifer by resisting temptation. â€Å"I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies; for the hardest victory is over.† Aristotle’s words embody the true difficulty Christ endured in first conquering Himself in order to be victorious over the Devil. Another indication of Beowulf and Christ’s similar nature is that both maintained loyal disciples, Beowulf, his fourteen thanes, and Christ, his twelve apostles. Both heroes are also shown to have been doubted in their respective tales. When Beowulf presents himself before King Hrothgar, Unferth, a noble warrior openly expresses his doubts in Beowulf’s character and overall credibility as one who will stop Grendel. Similarly, Christ was berated by High Prie sts of the synagogues for his astonishing wisdom; He was not taken seriously by the elders, simply because He was a child at the time- the Priests challenged all Christ had to say,Show MoreRelatedBeowulf Is The Oldest Recorded Poem1328 Words   |  6 PagesThe epic poem, Beowulf, is the oldest recorded poem in English and at 3200 lines long, comprises roughly ten percent of the surviving poetry in Old English. Although written in this language, Beowulf focuses on the feats of the poem’s namesake Beowulf, a Geatish prince, and the invading Germanic tribes in Denmark. Understood early on in the poem, these tribes have a lengthy and powerful warrior culture; a culture heavily influenced by heroic virtues, blood vengeance, and paganism. Along with theseRead MoreChristian Allegory in Beowulf1027 Words   |  4 PagesThe Anglo-Saxon poem â€Å"Beowulf† takes the reader back into a time long past; one of family, fate, and fealty. Beowulf offers a glimpse of a society strug gling between two different paths, one path being the assimilation into the new Christian traditions and the other is the fast fading past of glorified warriors and family ties. In the poem, the reader can see the attempts of the poet to convey the values and stories of Judeo-Christianity in a society of Anglo-Saxon paganism. The poet illustratesRead MoreEssay on Comparing the Heroes in The Dream of the Rood and Beowulf1204 Words   |  5 PagesThe  Heroes in The Dream of the Rood and Beowulf  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   In The Dream of the Rood, the poet has added elements of the idealized heroic death (as exemplified in Beowulf and The Battle of Maldon) to the crucifixion. He has also eliminated details of the story that tend to render Christ as a figure of pathos, in order to further Christs identification with the other glorious warriors Anglo-Saxon poems.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   When a hero meets his death, for example, he is usually surrounded byRead MoreWilliam Shakespeare s The Dream Of The Rood, Beowulf, And The Canterbury Tales Essay1414 Words   |  6 PagesMedieval stories of â€Å"The Dream of the Rood,† Beowulf, and The Canterbury Tales contained some of the British culture concerning gender, religion, and the view of heroes. One aspect of British culture of the Medieval times was the stereotypes of gender and certain expectations in gender roles. For example, the poet of â€Å"The Dream of the Rood† used masculine and feminine language to show position of power (masculine) and powerlessness (feminine). Christ and the Cross shift back and forth between havingRead MoreAnalysis Of The Dream Of The Rood 1727 Words   |  7 Pagesanswer in any order you wish. . . (1) Our book includes Dream of the Rood (or cross); you can find it on pages 32-36. In your view, does this poem help us better to understand and interpret Beowulf? Should they be assigned together? In The Dream of the Rood, the Cross shows a vas sort of fidelity to Christ all through the whole torturous killing. This effective scene indicates Jesus baring himself and climbing onto the cross. He does this with much fearlessness, he displays an incredible amountRead More Dragons in Beowulf and in Edmund Spenser’s The Faerie Queene1982 Words   |  8 PagesDragons in Beowulf and in Edmund Spenser’s The Faerie Queene When one usually thinks of a dragon, one thinks of dragon-slayers, adventure, damsels in distress, and cheap fantasy novels. Dragons in literature have not always been used for such meaningless entertainment. There are many precedents for dragons in medieval literature, two of the most prominent being in the Old English poem Beowulf and in Edmund Spenser’s The Faerie Queene. In both of these epic poems, dragons playRead MoreHeroism and Leadership: Beowulf1382 Words   |  6 PagesNapierkowski adds relationship to the list. The relationship is between the follower and leader – how they rely on each other. To attain a heroic title as a leader, the followers must obey the codes of nobility put upon society and successfully put it into play, as well as build a strong bond with the fellow leader. Every Hero was a leader once, and every leader was once a follower. I am a great Heroic figure, but I was also a follower. I followed and performed duties for the second child of HealfdeneRead More Christian and Pagan Influence in Paradise Lost and Beowulf Essay4093 Words   |  17 PagesChristian and Pagan Influence in Paradise Lost and Beowulf  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚   In Paradise Lost, Milton is adept at drawing from both Christian and pagan sources and integrating them in such a way that they reinforce one another (Abrams 1075). Of course it is a commonplace for critics to believe that Milton valued his Christian sources more highly than the pagan ones (Martindale 20); this is most likely due to the fact that he regarded the Christian sources as vessels of the truth. His classical allusionsRead MoreAn Analytical View of Beowulf Essays2415 Words   |  10 Pages Was the story of Beowulf’s battle between good and evil a reflection of Christ battling Satan? There are 3 major battles within Seamus Heaneys edition of the epic poem Beowulf all of which earn Beowulf some heroic status for saving the town from the evil antagonists that lurk, but is there a deeper meaning behind these battles than just an old tale? Is there some metaphor we are supposed to perceive? Throughout Beowulf there are a lot of different themes to pick and choose from, some interestingRead More Sir Gawain vs Beowulf Essay2076 Words   |  9 PagesAlthough Gawain and Beowulf share many similarities, their characters are almost complete opposites. Both aim for some sort of fame, one more than the other; differing in the way they attempt to achieve this success. Gawain remains true and looks to humility to guide him, whereas Beowulf is very prideful and selfish, loving nothing more than boasting about his virtues. Regardless, both go through tremendous changes througho ut their quests, dealing with repercussions, and many challenging obstacles

Exegesis Paper on Luke 1249-53 Free Essays

string(50) " is put to death and they arise as new creations\." â€Å"I came to bring fire to the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 I have a baptism with which to be baptized, and what stress I am under until it is completed! 51 Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. 52 For now on five in one house there will be divided, three against two and two against three; 53 They will be divided: father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law. (Luke 12:49-53) â€Å"I came to bring fire to the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled (v49)! † As I read these words from this passage again, I can almost hear the urgency and emotion that was in Jesus’ voice when he spoke them. We will write a custom essay sample on Exegesis Paper on Luke 12:49-53 or any similar topic only for you Order Now â€Å"I came to bring fire to the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled (v49)! † This is Jesus describing his mission, his purpose for entering into our world: to cast fire on the earth. Yet it had not happened yet, for with great longing in his voice, he tells his disciples, â€Å"how I wish it were already kindled (v49)! But whatever do these strange words mean? What is this fire about which Christ speaks of? How or when did he cast this fire to the earth, if he ever did? There are occasions in the Bible when fire did fall from heaven. Fire and brimstone fell from heaven upon Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:24-25) and destroyed those towns and all its inhabitants. One of the ten plagues against Egypt was fire and hail from heaven (Exodus 9:3). The prophet Elijah called down fire from heaven that incinerated soldiers sent from wicked King Ahaziah (2 Kings 1:9-17). Lightning is sometimes described as fire from heaven in the Bible (Psalm 27:9; Psalm 144:5-6). All of these fires from God, however, were destructive fires. And it is the destructive and consuming force of fire that we usually think of when we think of fire. Does it sound like Jesus to be longing and wishing for destruction? No, the fire that Jesus came to cast on the earth is none of those fires. It is not a destructive fire. It is the fire of the Holy Spirit. The Scriptures sometimes associates the Holy Spirit with fire. In the book of Revelation, the Holy Spirit is pictured as â€Å"seven lamp stands with burning flames† (Revelation 4:5). John the Baptist prophesied concerning Jesus, â€Å"I baptize you with water, but he who is more powerful than I is coming; I am not worthy to untie the thong of his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire† (Luke 3:16). But do we have any Biblical evidence that Jesus ever sent the Holy Spirit from heaven in the form of fire? Yes we do and it happened on the Day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts 2. 1â€Å"When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly from heaven there came a sound like the rush of a violent wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 3Divided tongues, as of fire, appeared to them, and a tongue rested on each of them. 4 All of them filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages as the Spirit gave them ability (Acts 2:1-4). †Later, when Peter stood up and preached a sermon before thousands of curious onlookers, he explained to them what the tongues of fire meant, 32 â€Å"This Jesus God raised up, and of that all of us are witnesses. 3Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you both see and hear (Acts 2:32-33). The resurrected Jesus, ascended to the right hand of God had poured forth the Holy Spirit from heaven; he had cast the fire of the Holy Spirit to the earth. When the fire of the Spirit fell upon the apostles they were transformed; they were filled with boldness, they praised the mighty works of God in many languages, and they spoke the Word of God to the gathered people. The fire was kindled! 3000 were baptized and converted on that one day. And that kindled fire spread throughout Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:8). But when Jesus spoke the words of our text, the day of Pentecost was still in the distant future. Our Lord knew that before the great day of casting fire upon the earth could come, something of monumental significance had to happen first. Our Lord put it this way, â€Å"I have a baptism with which to be baptized, and what stress I am under until it is completed (v51)! †One thing is sure. Jesus was not referring to his baptism in the Jordan by John the Baptist; that baptism had already happened. No, he was referring to another kind of baptism, a baptism that filled Jesus with distress as he thought about it; a baptism that he desperately wanted to be completed. He was talking about the baptism of his death and resurrection. For truly baptism is a death and resurrection. Listen to Paul in Romans 6 describe what happens when a Christian is baptized: 3â€Å"Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life (Romans 6:3-4). † Paul is not merely saying that baptism pictures a death and resurrection. He is saying that those who are baptized truly die with Christ, are buried with Christ, and rise again with Christ. Their sinful nature is put to death and they arise as new creations. You read "Exegesis Paper on Luke 12:49-53" in category "Papers" Jesus was our ultimate sacrifice who paid the ultimate price for our sins, but it wasn’t enough for Jesus to just die on the cross. He also had to be buried and resurrect from the dead. Through the acts of his death, burial, and resurrection, Jesus bought our salvation. He purchased salvation with his own blood and made it available to all who obey him. Jesus made the ultimate sacrifice for our sins by dying on the cross. He went to the cross perfect and sinless. He did not deserve death. He was the only person that could make atonement for our sins. In order to make atonement, the sacrifice had to be without blemish and without sin. This is why we cannot atone for our own sins. We are born into sin. Jesus was not born into sin because God was his father. We have to identify with his death by dying to sin. We die to sin, put off the old man, by repenting of our sins and turning away from sin. We can’t kill the sinful nature. What we put to death is the control the sinful nature has over us. 12 â€Å"Therefore, do not let sin exercise dominion in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions. 13 No longer present your members to sin as instruments of wickedness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and present your members to God as instruments of righteousness. 4 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law, but under grace (Romans 6:12-14). † Christians are not under the control of sin. We must live an overcoming life and not allow sin to work in our lives. â€Å"When then are we to say? Should we continue in sin, in order that grace may abound? 2 By no means! How can we who died to sin go on living in it? (Romans 6:1-2). †When Jesus died on the cross, He, who had no sin, paid the death penalty for our sins. Through baptism we are united, or joined with Christ in paying the death penalty for sin. We are baptized into His death, into the death penalty for sin. We, who are unable to return from death because we have sin, are joined to Christ and since Christ is sinless and was victorious over death, we, now being united with Him through baptism, are made victorious being united with Christ in His resurrection. Now if God allows us to participate in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, an event which occurred 2000 years ago, through baptism, it can truly be said we are saved through faith and God’s grace! Baptism can be likened to the Israelites coming up out of the land of slavery, passing through the Red Sea and entering the Promised Land. Baptism can be likened to passing through the flood of Noah. Baptism is about leaving our old sinful, worldly ways behind and taking upon our shoulders the yoke of Christ. It is about lifestyle change and dying to ourselves and doing God’s will instead of ours. Our reason and purpose for living changes after baptism. Afterward is a new way of life. Baptism is about heart, faith, total commitment, surrender, self-denial, death, resurrection, repentance, and seeking God’s mercy through Jesus Christ and the work He did on that cross on that day of infamy 2000 years ago. That is what Jesus meant by his baptism: His death and resurrection which atoned for the sins of the whole world, by which God offers forgiveness and eternal life to all who believe and are baptized, â€Å"he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world, 1 John 2:2). But once Jesus underwent his â€Å"baptism,† then he could, and did, cast fire on the earth, that is, gave the Spirit to his church. From that day until this the fire of the Spirit has fallen on the Church, and through it, has set the unbelieving world ablaze; this raging fire has spread, bringing not destruction, but salvation to an uncountable number. There is great debate as to what this â€Å"fire† is that Jesus wants to pour upon the earth, but it is more than likely that Jesus is speaking about the coming of the kingdom of God and of the terrible judgment that faces humanity in that day. The coming day of the kingdom is not prefigured by â€Å"peace† on earth, but rather by â€Å"fire†. There is ultimately the fire of the great judicial inquest, but in the meantime, the Day of Judgment is prefigured in the fire of Jesus â€Å"baptism†, (v50), and in the fire of â€Å"division†, (v51). Jesus knows well enough now that the coming kingdom of God is realized through tribulation, and for Jesus, this means suffering and death. Jesus must himself face the wrath of God and so he sets his eyes turned toward Calvary and with determination, presses onward toward the end. Jesus’ â€Å"baptism† (the word is being used figuratively here) is his suffering and death on the cross, his atoning sacrifice for sin on behalf of those who have put their trust in him for salvation. In verse 51. Jesus aligns himself with the Old Testament prophets when he reminds his listeners that the coming day of the Lord is not a day of peace, but rather, is a day of judgment, a day of apocalyptic tribulation, a day when the saved are separated from those doomed to destruction. In the present moment, this coming day is prefigured in social division, (v52-53). We know that Jesus makes much of the sign of â€Å"love†, the love of the brotherhood, but what we have here is another sign of the kingdom, the sign of division. Jesus now explains what he means by â€Å"division† and then, in (v53), supports his words by quoting Micah 7:6. â€Å"Division† was one of the commonly expected signs of the coming messianic kingdom, and so now, with the coming of Jesus the messiah, families can expect that household members will â€Å"turn against one another†. Some members of the family will stand with Jesus and others will stand against him. His coming would inevitably mean division;in other words, it did. That was one of the great reasons why the Romans hated Christianity because it tore families in two. Over and over again a man had to decide whether he loved better his friends and kin or Christ. The essence of Christianity is that loyalty to Christ has to take precedence over the dearest loyalty to Christ has to take precedence over the dearest loyalty of this earth. In other words a man must be prepared to count all things but loss for the excellence of Jesus Christ. In this Luke passage, we see Jesus pressing on toward Jerusalem and the cross, or as he calls it, his baptism. For Jesus, the cross was ever before his eyes. How different from Jewish idea of God’s King! Jesus came, not with avenging armies and flying banners, but to give his life a ransom for many. In his death, Jesus’ draws us close to the â€Å"fire† of the great judicial inquest. For the present, â€Å"division† prefigures that terrible day, a division realized through the preaching of the gospel. Some accept the Spirit-inspired message, but many reject it. None-the-less, through the proclamation of the gospel the kingdom of God finds its consummation. How to cite Exegesis Paper on Luke 12:49-53, Papers