Paul Rudolph was a student in the Masters program of Harvard’s school of architecture, and studied directly with Walter Gropius. Above is a snapshot of Paul Rudolph and his Harvard classmates (Rudolph is in the front row, far right.) © The Paul Rudolph Heritage Foundation
The Paul Rudolph Heritage Foundation maintains an archive of Rudolph materials: drawings, correspondence, original sketches, documents, photographs, manuscripts—and we welcome contributions to our ongoing project to document the life of this great architect.
We recently received the donation of an note from Paul Rudolph, which has originally been sent architect Preston T. Philips in 1993. It was hand-written on Rudolph’s official office notepaper (“monarch” size) stationary.
It reads as follows:
The note from Rudolph, in his own hand, from 1993—written after a half-century architectural work (and only 4 years before his passing.)
5 Feb 93
Dear Tommy,
Many thanks for your note regarding Harvard's recent celebration. Only one small difficulty -- it suggests that it's all over & I think I'm just now starting to know what I really want to accomplish.
Still want to see your house -- this summer for sure.
My best,
Paul
A brief note, but still one that is still interesting to contemplate. What was Rudolph conveying here?
“all over” ?
What could be meant by:
“Only one small difficulty — it suggests that it’s all over. . . .”
We don’t know exactly what happened at the Harvard celebration to which he refers—but we can give some historic context for Rudolph’s thinking.
Paul Rudolph was an architecture student at Harvard in the 1940’s: his education started before World War II, and he returned to complete it after service in the Navy. Rudolph had been a favored student of Walter Gropius—thus Rudolph is in the, then, unbroken “lineage” of the the development of Modern architecture—and had a direct infusion from the head of the Bauhaus master himself.
Walter Gropius, under whom Rudolph had studied at Harvard in the 1940’s. While Paul Rudolph’s architectural work strongly diverged from the style taught by Gropius, he never repudiated his old teacher, and always said that Gropius had taught a strong basis from which to work. Photograph by Louis Held.
But by 1993, so much had happened within architecture:, including:
Architects, world-wide, had been exploring multiple creative pathways: departing from the purist canonical rules of functionalism (and the limited range of forms that were allowed.). Most had rejected such strictures.
There was a deep questioning of the ecological and urban impact of Modernism.
There was a widespread suspicion of the the Modern architectural “establishment.”
The episode of Postmodernism (which had loudly arose, and then already fallen by that time.)
The advent and spread of Deconstruction.
The fixation on “Starchitects”—botgh in the professional journals and stronly evident in the wider culture.
Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that these phenomenon had happened to Modern architecture—an ongoing battering against the heritage, teachings, and models of Gropius, Mies, and Le Corbusier. Its functionalist and social-mission foundations were undermined, as was its claim to be be the sole and inevitable source of solutions to architectural and urban challenges.
So when Rudolph says,
“Only one small difficulty — it suggests that it’s all over. . . ”
perhaps he’s saying that Modernism was not quite a dried-out well, but rather that the possibilities which Modernism offered were not yet fully explored.. Alexander Kouzmanoff, an architect of Rudolph’s generation (they were born a year apart), contended the same thing: in the middle of the Postmodern onslaught, he asserted that “palette” of Modern architecture had not been exhausted.
In other words: it’s not over yet.
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER LINE?
The cover of an issue of Architectural Record, in which we get a hint of Rudolph’s deeper thinking on space—at least as of 1973, when this was published.
In 1993, when he wrote the note, Rudolph was his mid-70’s. He had well over a half-century of professional practice. and over 300 projects in his portfolio—and as anybody who’d ever met or worked with Rudolph could testify, he consistently conveyed a stance of clarity and certainty.
So, at this point in his career, what could he have meant by:
“. . . .I think I'm just now starting to know what I really want to accomplish.”
Unfortunately for historians, Rudolph did not keep a diary where one might have found clarifications of these thoughts, nor did he make a distinct public declaration on this point. We know he had generated a number of texts over the years, in the hope of writing a book—extant are some manuscripts relevant to such a project, but unfortunately, it never came to consummation.
We’ve asked Mr. Philips if he has any further information about what Rudolph meant in the note, but he says that he never heard any follow-ups from Rudolph on this point.
So we can only speculate what Rudolph meant—but there’s evidence, from different aspects of Rudolph’s career, from which a variety of hypotheses can be drawn:
1. NEVER ENDING CREATIVITY:
“Part of the beauty of [his] work is the release it offers from the idea of perfection. His architecture, like life itself, renders perfection irrelevant. With every theme he explored [he] revealed a fresh realm of possibilities.”
The above is Arthur Drexler’s characterization of the ever-renewing creative potential of Frank Lloyd Wright, but it could well have been written about Rudolph. Though educated directly by Gropius, Rudolph's works are the prime example of the transcendence of utilitarian dogmas. His oeuvre is layered and intense with spatial verve, and his forms and use of materials are deployed with endless variety and the power of a sculptor. It shows that the creator—no matter at what point in his career—is not finished yet: there are always further paths to pioneer. So the context for Rudolph’s note is the ongoing exploratory mode he displayed— indeed, going back to the beginning of his career.
2. THE BARCELONA PAVILION:
Though a central icon of Modernism—and part of every Modern architect’s education—the Barcelona Pavilion had remained only a tantalizing set of images: it had been destroyed shortly after the 1929 exposition of which it was a part, and could only be experienced distantly and dimly through a few vintage photographs and drawings.
After decades of proposals to reconstruct it, the Barcelona Pavilion was rebuilt—-and, not long before this note was sent, Rudolph visited it and had an intense and illuminating experience here. The building—so long revered by architects—was still worth veneration, but Rudolph found not for the reasons evoked by the old photos drawings, and the texts that had agglomerated around them. Rudolph’s direct experience of the building is shared in his dialogue with Peter Blake (and a series of analytical drawings Rudolph made, illustrating his observations).
Rudolph’s striking reactions to what he actually saw in Barcelona—as distinct from what he’d expected—perhaps point to a him having a breakthrough in his perceptions of what’s important in architecture. In other words: as a result of those experiences in Barcelona, perhaps he’s newly “starting to know” some important things about architecture.
The Concourse (also known as Beach Road II) in Singapore, which encompassed offices and a shopping center. A project starting in the early 1980’s, it’s an example of work from the period when Rudolph was beginning to plan and build projects at a large urban scale.
3. WORKING AT URBAN SCALE:
Ever since Rudolph’s first trip to Europe in the late 1940’s (having been awarded Harvard’s Wheelwright prize for travel), he had been a keen and thoughtful observer of urbanism—particularly about what was missing or vacuous in Modernism’s response to the challenges of designing cities. While Rudolph’s decades of work had included projects at civic scale, most large urban planning schemes and proposals remained un-built. [A cache of unbuilt work is not a reflection on Rudolph, as an examination of the project lists of any architectural or urban planning firm will show a similar score-card.]
Starting in the early 1980’s, that changed for Rudolph: he designed a number of large, urban projects that were built: city buildings of significant size to encompass apartments and condos, offices, and shopping. These were not just separate buildings, but rather coordinated complexes which integrated multiple functions into the urban fabric. So perhaps Rudolph had another form of “starting to know”, as he was finally experiencing [and, presumably learning from] working at the civic scale about which he had long theorized.
OUR DONOR
We offer a special thank-you to Preston T. Phillips, Architect, who donated the Paul Rudolph note to our archive. Mr. Philips worked for Rudolph, and went on to a career as a creator of homes, buildings, and interiors distinguished by their creative and elegant forms and spaces. You can read an overview of his prolific career HERE.
THE PAUL RUDOLPH HERITAGE FOUNDATION ARCHIVE
Former students, employees, clients, and friends of Paul Rudolph have contributed important materials which help illuminate aspects of his life and career. We are grateful for these generous donations—and we continue to welcome further materials for the archive.
If you have materials you might want to donate, please contact us at:
office@paulrudolphheritagefoundation.org
An example of donations to the archives of the Paul Rudolph Heritage Foundation Shown here is part of the body of Rudolph drawings and documents contributed by R.D. Chin. Included are renderings, posters, construction drawings, and original sketches. The Foundation continues to welcome donations. which help further research into the work and life of Paul Rudolph. Photo: Kelvin Dickinson, for the Paul Rudolph Heritage Foundation