The Sol LeWitt installation MASS_MoCA</a> really is my happy place. <a href="http://t.co/rZERLYJ0SL">pic.twitter.com/rZERLYJ0SL</a></p>— Alexandra Lange (LangeAlexandra) May 28, 2014
I paid my second visit to the Sol LeWitt: Wall Drawing Retrospective at Mass MoCA on Wednesday. Both times it has been a meditative experience to walk the three floors of his work, journeying from color to black-and-white, graphite to marker, two dimensions to three. The light, the space, the layering of works on parallel and perpendicular walls within the space: all the elements combine to make LeWitt’s “recipes” stronger.
LeWitt + Kahn, Yale University Art Gallery. pic.twitter.com/h2O43cdXfm
— Alexandra Lange (@LangeAlexandra) May 24, 2014Oddly, this was my fourth LeWitt experience of the week, including the Yale University Art Gallery, Dia:Beacon, and LeWitt + Charles Moore at the Williams Museum of Art. Yale’s several black-and-white LeWitts similarly gain strength from architectural juxtaposition. There’s one in the lobby, its grid contrasting with Louis Kahn’s triangular concrete grid ceiling, and one in the new/old wing, orthogonal against a set of neo-classical arches. As I wandered, I began to tweet.
One of the things I love: way each drawing becomes wall then distant landscape, in turn, as you stroll slowly past. pic.twitter.com/9cTiC8MDs2
— Alexandra Lange (@LangeAlexandra) May 28, 2014
Some pieces correspond, others conflict. pic.twitter.com/ZtYW3M4H4I
— Alexandra Lange (@LangeAlexandra) May 28, 2014
After all the color, the early pencil drawings look like air. pic.twitter.com/U4HcIWfQkt
— Alexandra Lange (@LangeAlexandra) May 28, 2014
No. 797 is my favorite. "The first drafter has a black marker…" Marker and human frailty. pic.twitter.com/N6JQwFb2nj
— Alexandra Lange (@LangeAlexandra) May 28, 2014
The rest of the museum had several new and beautiful exhibits too.
Another topographic artist: Teresita Fernandez MASS_MoCA</a> cc <a href="https://twitter.com/alexismadrigal">alexismadrigal pic.twitter.com/hqViYskvRJ
— Alexandra Lange (@LangeAlexandra) May 28, 2014
This Marko Remec tank MASS_MoCA</a> is quite spectacular. <a href="http://t.co/on21TbnUN8">pic.twitter.com/on21TbnUN8</a></p>— Alexandra Lange (LangeAlexandra) May 28, 2014
The town of North Adams itself is not without art interventions. This bus shelter, a 2012 installation by Victoria Palermo, seems inspired by LeWitt.
North Adams bus shelter. pic.twitter.com/uFekSMtYcz
— Alexandra Lange (@LangeAlexandra) May 28, 2014At the end of the day, the common ground between Fernandez, Remec and LeWitt was clouds.

I was interviewed for the ABC radio program Future Tense on the perils and promise of civic crowdfunding, along with Bryan Boyer and Rodrigo Davies.
Crowd-funding is all the rage. Online, people donate to all manner of projects and inventions. But could the crowd-funding approach be scaled up? Could you, for instance, crowd-fund the construction of a community hall or a public swimming pool?
Well, they have with the former and they’re trying with the latter. It’s called ‘civic-crowd-funding’ and its proponents see it as a way of meeting community needs in an age of shrinking government expenditure.
But how realistic is it? And does it simply allow governments to abrogate their civic responsibilities?
For my previous thoughts on the topic read Against Kickstarter Urbanism and Why Building A Park Takes More Than Crowdfunding.
Barbara Stauffacher Solomon supergraphics at the Sea Ranch Swim Club (Jim Alinder/Princeton Architectural Press)
“Stop work. It looks like a prison.” That was the telegram from the developers in response to Moore Lyndon Turnbull Whitaker’s (MLTW) first design for the Sea Ranch, which celebrates its 50th anniversary this year. Architects Charles Moore, Donlyn Lyndon, William Turnbull, and Richard Whitaker, working with landscape architect Lawrence Halprin, had used sugar cubes to model the 24-foot module for each of the condominium’s original ten units. And that boxy choice, combined with the simplest of windows and vertical redwood siding, produced something more penitentiary than vacation (it’s sited on a choice stretch of Sonoma coast).
After a pause, the team scrambled to add texture: bay windows to break up the flat facades, private courtyards to differentiate a few units, and adjustments to the tower. Halprin imported a redwood stump to punctuate the main courtyard and, when MLTW’s “wooden rock” was completed, Barbara Stauffacher Solomon painted supergraphics on the monochrome interiors: numbers, stripes, dots, and arrows, adding a layer of pop iconography within the still-sober weathered form. The combination of timelessness and whimsy, landscape form and antic decoration, made the Sea Ranch highly photogenic and instantly influential. It was identified with a new Bay Region aesthetic, winning the AIA Twenty-Five Year Award in 1991, and ensuring (one might speculate) Moore would never straitjacket his work again.
The National 9/11 Memorial Museum, trident on the left, looking up into the entrance pavilion.
I thought I could review the National 9/11 Memorial Museum, which opens Wednesday, May 21. I can’t. It’s too soon. So I am just going to tell you what I saw and how I felt.
I walk in to the auditorium in Snohetta’s entrance pavilion. I signed up for an architecture tour, so I am dutifully taking notes. Very Scandi, I scribble. Neutral without being beige. Nice view of Calatrava’s transportation hub out the northeast corner. It’s a few days before President Obama’s visit, so they are running a test of a documentary about the day on the big screen. President George W. Bush is up there, then former Mayor Rudy Guiliani. They are talking about people jumping out of the windows of the World Trade Center. The hair on my arms stands on end. I have to sit down. They don’t even have to show the pictures. The words alone send me back.
I was at home in Brooklyn. I heard the thud of the first plane. My neighbors and I watched the first tower fall from the roof, though I have no memory of the moment. We all rushed downstairs to shut our windows against the ash. My apartment was burgled and the police actually came. I think they wanted to have something to do. I didn’t know anyone who died. My 9/11 experience may seem like nothing. And yet I would never go to this museum.
The memorial plaza had been fine. I had no name to look for. It was a sunny day, the trees were growing in to make a horizontal canopy, lacy against all that vertical glass, the tourists were in shorts and it hardly felt solemn. Now, a week later, the barricades are down and the plaza is finally open to the street. It’s only going to get less solemn.
Snohetta designed the entrance pavilion, a faceted three-story structure of striped metal and reflective glass dwarfed by 1 and 4 World Trade. It was once supposed to have profane, city-oriented functions too: The Drawing Center, a performance space, but it lost those purposes along the way. Now it is an elegant carapace for a grab-bag of necessities: ticketing (seeing the $24 price tag on the booth shocks again), security, a café and that auditorium. The top floor conceals the mechanical systems for the museum, the PATH station, everything below. It’s all very soothing – Snohetta principal Craig Dykers points to the baffling behind the wood-slat ceiling as an acoustic response to the transition from plaza to museum.
The first artifact from 9/11 you see on the site is a forking steel column from the north tower, its neo-Gothic points immediately recognizable. The trident is embedded in a skylit corner of the pavilion, drawing down the side of the staircase leading to the museum. It seems odd that this essential piece of the real thing is accessible only to paying visitors. Dykers mentions the constant parade of people “pressing the flesh” against the western façade of the building. During the day you have to put your palms to the glass to see the crook. The column is rawer and more direct than anything outside.
Down the stairs, below the lip of the plaza, you enter the museum proper, designed by Davis Brody Bond. There’s a broad desk, dark wood. It looks like a hotel lobby on the Death Star. A total aesthetic jump cut from Snohetta’s pavilion and Michael Arad and Peter Walker’s memorial above. On the left, through a triangular dip in the wall, you can see the hovering form of the south footprint. The whole multistory solid has been clad in spun aluminum, but at this distance it looks like granite, and like a monolith.
This underground lobby is a good place to assess what the process of making the 9/11 memorial has done to the architecture. It has broken it into three parts, which can’t and don’t relate. The above-ground memorial is like a pancake, a surface treatment that follows in the design traditions of the best modern places of remembrance but, because it is in New York City, because it is surrounded by office buildings, was found wanting as a sacred site. The dramatic plunge of water into the memorial pools, which, if revealed underground, could have connected sunlight to shadow, one architecture to another, is hidden from sight behind those aluminum panels. That forking steel column is isolated, far from its brother artifacts that appear, at odd intervals, along the ramp which leads you through the museum and down to bedrock. I wanted their positions to relate to their original location at the Twin Towers, to form a geography of remembrance. Even the slurry wall, the centerpiece of the Foundation Hall, would be more powerful connected to the surface, glimpsed through the memorial plaza, touched by daylight. Underground, carefully framed, artificially lit, it seemed robbed of the toughness that made it an unlikely engineering icon.
As I descended the ramp, past the map of the routes of the planes on 9/11, under the sound cloud of voices telling the story of the planes, overlapping, an international chorus of narrators, past the map made of words projected on panels, all I could think of was Orpheus descending into the underworld. It was dark, one could only go down, and one had the sense of steeling oneself for what was to come. I wondered if that ramp would be a trail of tears: how long could you last without crying or feeling faint? The jumpers? The slurry wall? The faces? I read every one of the New York Times profiles of those who died on 9/11. It felt, in those weeks after the attack, like the least a person could do. But would I want to enter the south footprint and dwell among those faces, those stories, again? Not now.
Turn the corner of the ramp and you see projections of the Missing posters on the wall. One has the sense of shifting gears from the historical to the personal, from place to people, though the line is not exact. Local Projects designed the multimedia exhibitions: the sound cloud, the maps, the algorithmic presentation of news stories about 9/11, with the idea that nothing about the history of the site was set in stone. History is in the making, and so the museum is programmed for change. And yet, the size, tone and materials of the architecture make the museum feel anything but provisional. The architects from Davis Brody Bond said the scale of the footprints, which gave them the outlines of their site, are commensurate with the scale of the event. But are they? We don’t know that yet. The scale of historic events is one of the most changeable factors. The 9/11 Museum feels scaled to the excess of public emotionality in the aftermath of 9/11 (which is different from the emotion, grief and trauma of those who were there or lost loved one). It feels like a tomb as big as the Met.
A final frustration. It would have been moving if the Survivors Staircase, which carried so many to safety, now helped to lead visitors back to the surface, back toward the light of day. Instead the Survivors Staircase goes only down, embedded beside another set of stairs that lead you at long last to bedrock. It is redundant. It is subsumed. It is robbed of its strength as a piece of ordinary architecture transformed by experience into a symbol of something more. At the 9/11 Museum there were so many opportunities to let the remains of the Twin Towers speak, but it felt to me as if more architecture and more design were instead laid on top.
The architects said we were to find optimism at the bottom of the ramp, where you find this quote from Virgil: “No day shall erase you from the memory of time.” To me, claustrophobic after 90 minutes underground, this seemed the opposite, like my arm was being twisted to remember better. My 9/11 experience was of New York, as a whole, dusting itself off and moving on. That relentlessness was a balm and, I believe, a strength. The grandiosity and redundancy of these vast spaces (memorial/museum, history/experience, telling/retelling) points in the opposite direction. I’m not going to go back to see the rest and I suspect, if you lived here on 9/11/01, you shouldn’t either.
As part part of NYCxDESIGN (which used to be Design Week, which used to just be the International Contemporary Furniture Fair), Herman Miller and Maharam have created a special installation of new and old work by Alexander Girard in a storefront at 446 West 14th Street. It celebrates reissued fabrics by both companies, as well as new ottomans, side tables and pillows produced by Herman Miller. I suspect we will be seeing the Environmental Panels, in stars and hearts, in a lot of designer kids bedrooms next year.

For Girard superfans like me, the treat was seeing an homage to his own showroom designs in white-painted metal, and archival treasures including neckties, sample books, Braniff brochures and a couple of rare two-tone Girard chairs. I loved the juxtaposition of vintage photographs, blown up so you could seen the dots, with to still-spectacular colors of Girard-designed tableware, textiles and graphics. The coffee tables are also helpfully stocked with books by and about Girard’s friends George, Eero, Isamu, and so on. The brand-new Apartamento #13 includes a lengthy interview with Girard’s son and grandchildren, along with an extensive photo portfolio with special emphasis on his own house in Santa Fe. Maynard Parker’s photographs of that adobe house can be seen online at the Huntington. The storefront exhibition is free, and up until May 28.
For more on Girard, read Designing with Folk Art or watch Beyond Gorgeous.



Courtesy Metropolitan Museum of Art
Of all the spectacular pieces in the current Metropolitan Museum of Art exhibition Charles James: Beyond Fashion, my favorite was a bottle-green dress, its skirt and part of its fitted bodice made from a single, triangular piece of cloth worked around and up. In this dress, as in so many others, from cocoon-like coats to dressing-gowns stitched from slinky ribbons, James used the nature and structure of different types of fabric to achieve his desired effect. Some softly puff, some stiffly flare, some pucker for emphasis.
No photos allowed. If I could, I would have taken snapshots of where one material met another, like the dark velvet and pearly silk on the show’s marquee clover dress. This dress, like all the other ballgowns in the upstairs gallery, was mounted on a circular smoked-glass pedestal, installed in a room with mirrored walls and sepulchral lighting. Upon each gown, a robotic arm and digital screen danced attendance. These screens offered collateral, including digital recreations of the flat pieces of fabric assembling themselves into the dress you saw before you. It was interesting to see how the parts made the whole, but on screen all cloth looks alike. As one gown rose and crimped, all I could see in the pixel sheen was the crinkle-coating on so many contemporary buildings. It seemed strange to remove the designer from the frame in a show all about one-off dresses. Those structures are indeed made in the computer, but these were now. How does it benefit fashion to be reprocessed as architecture, here by Diller Scofidio + Renfro as exhibit designers? Would any of this have been necessary had the lighting not been quite so dim?
Downstairs, a few monitors showed close-ups of faille v. satin, where you could see the difference in warp and weft. But what did we gain over actual fabric swatches? Why not upend a real dress rather than having a camera take us underneath. I wanted more photos, seen as a field, rather than sequentially on screen, of dresses in use and under construction. The most illuminating cabinets might be the first upstairs display of monochrome muslins, cut and sewn before James touched more expensive satin, in all their collapsed glamor.
The no photo policy seemed odd, because the galleries’ mirrored walls called out for selfies, with ballgowns behind, as if sending yourself into the Cecil Beaton ballgown photograph on the poster. The James quotes on the wall, very Vreeland, also seemed ready for Instagram immortality. Yes, it would have been totally annoying with all the iPhones out, but strange to set such a table and deny people the pleasure.
As for our robot overlords, which as Roberta Smith wrote, “suggest that each dress is being stalked by an ugly duckling,” I decided they were best regarded as present-day walkers, intended to help show off the goods. Who needs a man when you have got a cameraman? Though their presence might have been more to the point if they were imitating paparazzi rather than scanners. In recent years architecture has often tried to borrow glamor from fashion, seeing greater public appeal. (Zaha’s Chanel bauble, the Skin + Bones exhibition.) The crumpling digital dresses onscreen suggested obvious Gehry-satin connections. But James had to work much more carefully to get from flat to form, and to digitize is in fact to diminish the mental manipulations required for traditional pattern-making. Why is fashion trying to borrow from architecture in turn? To be taken seriously, one suspects. (The headline on Martin Filler’s James essay in the New York Review of Books is “Engineering Elegance”). But this hardly seems necessary when you can see the goods up close. The Met’s display choices abstract when they should be drawing us closer. James never needed to be an archetype to be admired.
For more background on Charles James: Judith Thurman in the New Yorker.
A digitally-driven revival of interest in sewing proves that people want to create, but the 3D-printing movement is failing to cater to a market that wants something practical and beautiful.
There’s an appetite for the “refashion,” recycling an old dress or an adult T-shirt, and turning it into something new. Once upon a time, the use of flour sacks as fabric prompted grain-sellers to start offering their wares in flowered cotton bags. If some boutique grain company began doing that again, there would be a run on their product. Under the technology radar, there’s a community of people sharing free patterns, knowledge and results, without the interpolation of brands, constantly obsolescent machinery, or the self-serving and myth-making rhetoric Morozov finds in Chris Anderson’s Makers. There are the answers to the questions “Why bother?” and “How creative?” Rather than sewing being a cautionary tale, 3D printing can’t become a consumer good until it learns a few lessons from why we sew now.
From the elevator cab to the smoky gray walls, the MFA Boston’s current show Quilts and Color is a riot of vibrating hues, clever geometries and optical illusion. Curators have dosed their wall texts heavily with color theory, and installed key works of Op Art around the galleries, but the connections are both obvious and unnecessary. I know it sounds like a starring-Dame-Judi-Dench sort of exhibit, but like Judi Dench, always worth watching.






Courtesy Lance Wyman
The Olympic games are not just a challenge for athletes, but for their designers. The world’s preeminent international sports competition has to level the playing field for communication too. Each sports event, each amenity needs clear wayfinding, and in a minimum of three languages. Those graphics need to stand above the crowd and out in the arena. Given that challenge, what would you do?
If you are Lance Wyman, you opt instead to make a picture. And this is exactly what he did, when he was 29 and won the competition to design the graphics for the Mexico ’68 Olympics. Nineteen pictures, one for each sport; 19 more for the cultural events; more still for restrooms, concessions, transportation. Rather than a sea of words, you create a hierarchy of icons anyone can understand. You put your graphics on free-standing signs, on pavements, on walls, so that they become a pattern in the city.
On X
Follow @LangeAlexandraOn Instagram
Featured articles
CityLab
New York Times
New Angle: Voice
Getting Curious with Jonathan Van Ness