Architecture
Out the front door of Saarinen House, across Academy Way, was a narrow brick walkway that led on to a walled courtyard. In the center was a tall Doric column; to the left were redbrick buildings and to the right a long brick path with hedges. The buildings were part of the Academy; on the second floor was my office, from the bay window, I could glimpse the courtyard and column. Below my office was a brick wall and enclosed grass yard; faintly, I could hear traffic nearby on Lone Pine Road. If I walked along that road, I would reach the entrance to the boys’ school; large ornamental iron gates. Like everything else, I do mean every thing, the gates and enclosing arch, were designed by Eliel Saarinen. The main entrance was a pedestrian entrance for, in 1925, the school was planned to be residential with dormitories, dining room, library, classrooms, a small hospital and a barber’s shop! When I arrived, over fifty years later, a barber was still cutting hair; days of yesteryear. Like the rest of our community, the school was very English, particularly the huge courtyard and beyond, hidden from view, were the spacious playing fields.
For a moment, I will return to the original Booth home; designed in 1908 by Albert Kahn. Mention has been made of the outside of this manor, red brick and Tudor in appearance, with ornamental gardens. The interior of this home looked even more English; with large entrance lobby, grand staircase, dark wood panels, carvings, ceramics, carpets, tapestries, statues, paintings, ornate furniture and opulent furnishings. The house is now used by the community and named Cranbrook House; sometimes referred to as Booth House. Upper floors are offices for Cranbrook Educational Community; the ground floor restored to its original appearance with lobby, living room, library and dining room. The library has shelves of books, with original bindings from the Cranbrook Press; priceless volumes. CEC Trustees held their meetings in this library; I would sit, looking through leaded windows to views outside or admiring decorative details of the interior. The large stone fireplace is resplendent with carvings; each one has a story. Tours are given and worth taking; the interior is enriched with many an art object, each with a story. My first and lasting impression is of being back in England; George Booth as lord of the manor but I was in America! (However, as stated earlier, I was described as “the cultural squire”?!) Tapestries covered the walls; at first glance, appearing medieval but, on closer inspection, above woven knights in armor were images of soldiers with tin hats! These were warriors not from the Middle Ages but World War One; my introduction to work in a style called “The American Renaissance”. Is this phrase not a contradiction in terms? Behind the library was a small room that Henry Booth was using as his office; an exquisite space with elaborately decorated ceiling. In other rooms were large candelabra, ornate standing lamps, hanging chandelier and decorative leaded windows, some with stained glass. George and Ellen Booth admired the designs of William Morris and were patrons of the Arts and Crafts, evident in their home and throughout the community.
In my mind, Christ Church Cranbrook, built 1924-28 and designed by Goodhue Associates, looks as if an authentic English church was plopped down on American soil. The interior with stained glass windows, ornate pews and mighty altar was like the church where I was christened as a babe; ‘The Church of England in Wales’, another contradiction in terms? The baptismal font at Christ Church, with other celebratory objects, reflects the best of the Arts and Crafts movement. Boys from the school sang in a choir and attended services; they walked back along the road to Cranbrook School (1925-28).
I liked to look at and use that main entrance to the boys’ school. How ironic that near to Detroit, home to the automobile, the school entrance was for pedestrians. Boys were boarders; they walked to their classrooms and to church. Nowadays, day students are dropped off by parents or drive their cars to school, while yellow school buses cross between coeducational schools. Not so in those founding years, as boys walked through these gates; designed by Eliel Saarinen and fabricated by Oscar Bach in 1928. I studied these gates intensely; I learnt what I know about Saarinen from looking. Articles and books were published later but, initially, I looked and looked; although long dead, Eliel Saarinen was my teacher. I walked past the school entrance, rarely used; with wrought iron gates closed. Later, I stopped to look as I was curious; I noted a pair of ornate birds atop the gate, each one was different. One peacock like bird had its elaborate tail going up; the other iron bird had a tail dropping down. How odd?! I looked again; this time, more carefully. I realized that nothing was as it appeared; the decorative elements were different on either side of these gates that opened inward to the courtyard. Not only were the birds different; so were their decorative supports. I began to look more intensely at these ornamental gates; the vertical bars were strengthened and decorated with horizontal braces. To my surprise, the braces were not placed equally but were seemingly random; up, down, in different alignments. Nearly forty of these decorative braces were arranged like a musical notation; creating a visual discord, yet in harmony? The gates were set within an archway of brick; above the gates was a stone lintel and brick gable of elaborate design with decorative niches. I counted twenty eight of these small curved niches on either side of a deep centered recess that held a carved owl. Each of these niches was of a different width and depth and, in a few instances, height. There were three rows stacked on one another as the triangular façade narrowed to its pinnacle. The bottom row had seven on either side; each different. The middle row had five and four; the top row was two and three. I was fascinated with this elaborate decorative asymmetry; may be as obsessed as the architect himself? Had I found the visual key to Saarinen’s architecture; enriching that which was symmetrical with asymmetrical decorative detail? Or was I was being naïve? Did the scholars know this? Who cares; I had fun and fulfillment looking!
The idea of these decorative elements as visual musical notations now seemed obvious. I began to understand how Eliel Saarinen was creating a grand orchestration of all the elements of art, architecture, design and nature. Cranbrook became one overwhelming creative concerto; a performance and production to walk through and enjoy. I was embraced and enriched by the virtuosity and genius of the architect.
I looked with greater scrutiny at buildings and decorative elements, from stone carving to leaded windows; nothing was what it appeared to be? The Cupola, designed by Eliel Saarinen in 1929, is an elaborate wrought iron construction atop four stone columns. On each column are four stone squares, each of equal proportions; in the center is a carved decorative detail. At first glance, the fact that each carving is of a different design can be missed. Unfortunately, we tend to be visually lazy and do not look?! I would take students and visitors on walks through the buildings; inside and outside. I would point out the details and decoration. I made people look intently and intensely; I wanted them to share my excitement and enthusiasm for the creative genius of Eliel Saarinen. I did the same with my lectures; using slides of images and details that I took myself for no others existed. To look is to see; sadly, our nation is one of visual illiteracy? Saarinen’s architecture offers an ongoing enrichment; each day is opportunity for another visual discovery and delight. Every day, I saw some new detail or element; a visual joy! Each day, I turned a new page in the architectural encyclopedia that is Cranbrook.
The cupola is placed to the side of the large courtyard of the boys’ school. In itself, the courtyard is a masterpiece of intricate design and decorative brickwork. Whether looking down on the ground or up to the side of a building; visual delights abound. As expressed in the words of a critic, Cranbrook is “a visual symphony”. The story is told that Eliel Saarinen would wander over to the school during its construction. He would ask the masons to pull out a brick slightly or, using his walking stick, point to a place to put in a darker brick. The architect wished to vary the surface and patina of the side of a building; look carefully and these subtle variations can de seen, here and there, just a few! Eliel was a master planner, acknowledged as a great city planner; at the same time, he had an obsession for detail and decoration, evident throughout Cranbrook. At the boys’ school there is much to see on the outside; brickwork; arches; ironwork; facades; walkways; benches; the pergola; the dining room. The magnificent interior of the boys’ dining room brought to my mind the tales of “Oliver Twist” while, may be, to my grandchildren, “Harry Potter”? The towering interior, supported by wooden beams, housed long tables and benches, tall candelabra and leaded windows. Again, details delight as each elegant window appears the same, yet subtle differences are evident. Many moments overwhelm me as I take this walk, decades later, down memory lane. Thanksgiving dinner for Academy students was held in the dining room; always memorable as we shared candlelight and camaraderie; turkey and thanks! I digress, let us continue our walk; this time to the girls’ school.
Kingswood (1929-31) is regarded as a defining work by Eliel Saarinen; some say that the design was influenced by the prairie style of Frank Lloyd Wright. Dare I suggest that the design was more to do with function; that the architecture is of gender? Is this too sexist? Nevertheless, I think that the school for boys is male; formal and regulated in appearance, rather military maybe? Even the tower, vertical and dominant, appears phallic? On the other hand, the girls’ school appears horizontal, gentle and delicate; to do with bonding and friendships? Of course, today none of this seems to matter, as the schools are coeducational; but the original form and function remain, evident in the design and architecture. The columns; cloister like corridors; courtyards; facades and roofs of the exterior are wondrous to behold. Mention must be made of benches, often stone, carved along or into a wall or courtyard. Throughout the community, Saarinen created places for people to sit, read, think, contemplate, meet, bond and talk. In quiet courtyards and gardens or in entrances and lobbies, benches exist; most apparent at Kingswood. To look at delicate detail of a carved column, formal and fluted, or at a beautiful bench, intricate and inviting, are amongst the delights of the girls’ school.
The dining room and auditorium are awesome and awe inspiring; certainly, I was in awe when I stepped into these breathtaking interiors. Eliel Saarinen designed these interiors in 1929; the entire family was involved. Eero Saarinen designed the furniture, the chairs and tables for the dining room; the chairs were in birch with pink paint and linen upholstery. The auditorium armchairs, more modern in appearance, were of tubular steel and wood, covered with green upholstery. To compare the chairs, the developing modernistic design of Eero becomes apparent. For the dining room, Eliel and Loja Saarinen designed the large wall hanging “Festival of the May Queen”; woven by Studio Loja Saarinen. The hanging is flanked by two tall torches, designed by Eliel. For the auditorium, daughter and designer Pipsan Saarinen Swanson, designed the stage curtains; wall decorations; and the ceiling with circular aluminum reflectors and silver leaf decoration. That ceiling is one of the wonders of modern design; when the lights come on, the feeling is of sheer wonderment. Eliel Saarinen was masterly in the use of light, natural and artificial; as seen in his home.
To return to Saarinen House seems right and proper; as we talk of the family working together on Kingswood. The multi talents of each enriched buildings and interiors: Eliel was painter, architect and designer; Loja was sculptor, designer and weaver; daughter Pipsan was a designer of costume, fabrics, interiors and furnishings; Eero was sculptor, designer and the most recognized and influential architect of his time. What a remarkable family; their aesthetic abilities and achievements evident throughout their home. Visitors came from afar to visit; architects Le Corbusier, Alva Alto and Frank Lloyd Wright. To tell a story that was told to me by Richard Thomas seems timely; he was at the house when Wright visited. Eliel enjoyed cocktail hour; his martinis were legendary at, what he described as, “the happiest hour of the day”! Naturally, the discussion was of architecture and design; the talk turned to symmetry and asymmetry. Wright became outspoken; in his volatile manner, he went over to the beautiful fireplace with its ornate iron peacocks. Dramatically, he pulled over the fire screen and pointed at white pine carefully balanced and unlit. Wright kicked the wood apart and said, “That’s what I think of symmetry and balance!” For a moment, his hosts, Loja and Eliel Saarinen said nothing; then Eliel quietly retorted, “You may be named Wright but, usually, you are wrong!” From that day on, that visiting architect was referred to as to as “Mr. Frank Lloyd Wrong”!