Olgiati Works concepts

8/10/2019 Olgiati Works concepts

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/olgiati-works-concepts 1/11

Architectural Association School of Architecture is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AA

Files.

http://www.jstor.org

The Malmö KonsthallAuthor(s): Adam Caruso, Olle Svedberg and Sune NordgrenSource: AA Files, No. 41 (Summer 2000), pp. 30-39Published by: Architectural Association School of ArchitectureStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/29544189Accessed: 19-08-2014 20:18 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org/

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aasa

http://www.jstor.org/stable/29544189

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


http://www.jstor.org/stable/29544189

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aasa

http://www.jstor.org/



JAN VELIUS

The Malm? Konsthall

Adam Caruso

I have

seen

three

very

different exhibitions

in

the

Malmo Konsthall.

In

each,

the

manner

in

which the

work

was

installed and the

way

in

which the

fabric of

the

building

was

subtly

modified

to

accommodate the

show made the

experience

of the

art

powerful.

Yet

this

reciprocal relationship

-

between the

physical

presence

of

a

gallery

and thework installed within it

flies

in the face of

current

orthodoxies about the

design of contemporary art space. Many recently

designed galleries provide

spaces

of maximum size

built with

a

minimum of tectonic detail.

Any

materials

or

assemblies that

might

make

ambiguous

the

relationship

between the installed work and the

30

gallery

are

avoided. Whilst

this is

an

improvement

on

many

gallery designs

of the

previous

forty

years

(a

period

characterized

by gallery-machines

that

were

more

adept

at

expressing

their

own

architectural

manifestos than

in

accommodating

the

art

that

they

were

designed

to

house),

the

production

of

large,

dematerialized

galleries

goes

against

a

widely

articu?

lated

preference

amongst

artists for

working

within

characterful, already existing non-art spaces.*

The

success

of

spaces

such

as

PS

1

in

New

York,

the Chinati Foundation

in

Marfa,

Texas and the

Hallen f?r

neue

Kunst

in

Schafmausen

is

testimony

to

an

interest

in

art s interaction with

varying

scales of

*

In

a

study

carried

in

advance

of the Bankside

project,

the T?te

asked

over

100

contemporary

art

practitioners

whether

they pre?

ferred

to

work

in

existing

spaces

or

purpose-built

art

spaces.

A

maj?

ority expressed

a

preference

for

working

in

existing, adapted

buildings.

AA FILES

41

This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Tue, 19 Aug 2014 20:18:37 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions






facing

page:

Gallery

interior,

March 1994

(following

the

restoration

by

White

Architects).

this page:

The

gallery

roof

during

construction

(1971-76).

space

and

varying

material conditions. The

highly

specific

engagement

between the

physical

context

of

these

places

and the

work installed within them also

provides

a

richness of

experience

for the viewer that is

rarely

achieved within the

large,

even

architecture of

the

purpose-built

art institution.

Yet,

in a new build?

ing,

how would

one

provide

a

spatial

richness that is

equivalent

to

that

of

an

existing

school,

barracks

complex

or

factory?

How

specific

can

an

art

space

be

if

it ismade for

temporary

exhibitions? The Malm?

Konsthall is

one

of the

very

few

purpose-built

con?

temporary

art

spaces

to

engage

with these issues.

Klas Anshelm s

design

for theMalm? Konsthall is

said

to

have been

inspired

in

part

by

a

bus

garage.

The extremely slight presence of the building within

the

flat,

expansive

space

of the

city,

together

with the

unremitting

blankness of its horizontal-board-marked

concrete

facades

are,

from

a

contemporary

perspec?

tive,

perverse

formal decisions

in

the

design

of

a

major public

building.

Although

this offhand

treat?

ment

of architectural

expectations

is

probably exactly

what Anshelm

intended,

the exterior reticence and

informality

of the

building

has

a

significant

effect

on

one s experience of its interior.

One

enters

the

Konsthall,

through

the thinnest of

thresholds,

from

an

exterior

space

formed

by

a

small

inflection

in

the

facade,

a

wooden bench

cantilevered

from the

concrete

wall and

a

simple

canopy.

Passing

through

the

glazed

doors of thewind

lobby

one

enters

directly

into the art

space.

The lack of mediation

between the

space

of the

city

and the

gallery

interior

is

only possible

because of the

protective

carapace

of

the closed

concrete

exterior,

an

enclosure that

serves

to

insulate the

art

within

from

the

unacceptably large

and

complex

scale of the

city.

And

yet,

the

points

of

contact

between interior and exterior

-

the

entrance

and

a

long

window

looking

out to

the

park

-

are so

thin

and

membranous

that the interior is

none

the

less

charged with an informality and lack of decorum that

is

a

direct result of the

abrupt

manner

of the

enclosure of

the

building.

The shock of

entering directly

into the

gallery

space

is

compounded by

the

expansiveness

and

brilliant whiteness of that interior. Its scale and

purposefulness

is

effectively

masked

by

the low and

meandering

line

of

the

concrete

enclosure.

A

generalized, large-scale

shed would

not

necessarily

facilitate the installation of small- and medium-sized

SWEDISH USEUM F ARCHITECTURE

AA FILES

41

3i







32

AA FILES

41







top:

Klas Anshelm s

designs.

bottom:

The Konsthall viewed

from

the

park during

a

project

by

Barbara

Kruger,

1994.

work. As

a

result,

Anshelm

has

introduced

barely

perceptible complexities

that allow for

a

rich

range

of

inhabitation within this

simple

enclosure. The

open

plan

is

charged by

three kinds

of

ceiling

that establish

overlapping

spatial

fields and

produce

room-like

attributes

even

when

the

space

is

not

divided

by

walls.

The firstof these

ceilings

is

a

neutral

grid

of

small roof

lights.

The

grid

is

sufficiently

fine to ensure that

rather

than

providing

a

visual connection

to

the

sky,

the hundreds of domes undermine

the substance of

the

large-span

roof

structure

and

fill

this

part

of the

interior with

a

brilliant

and

even

light.

The second

ceiling

territory

is dominated

by

a

monumental

pitched

volume which

is

glazed

on

its north

face.

Serving

almost

as

a

cupola

within the

gallery

as

a

whole,

the

large

area

of

glazing

faces

skyward

and is

both frame and window to a swathe of nineteenth

century

buildings

located

across

the

street,

powerfully

affecting

the

character of the

space

below.

The

last

territory

is formed

by

the arcade-like

space

that

runs

parallel

to

the

long,

floor-to-ceiling

window

at

the

west

of the

building.

The soffit f this

space

is

flat,

so

that

one

is drawn

to

the

trees

and wide

street

outside.

If,

in this

way,

the

park

isdrawn into the

gallery,

this

shop

window also

permits

the

gallery

to

be

projected

into the

city.

These

spatial

types

are not

simply diagrammatic

concepts.

The

arrangement

of the

building

is

sus?

tained and extended

by

a

coincident

material

inten?

sity

that

is

equally

subtle and

carefully judged.

Whilst

aa files

41

33







being

struck

by

the

size

and

lightness

of the

interior,

one

also

notices the

timber

floor that

runs

con?

tinuously

through

the

art

spaces.

A

spanning

structure

of

raw,

untreated

spruce

boards,

it establishes

the

generous

extent

of

a

factory

floor.

The

matte,

un?

treated surface is redolent of the wood-block floors

that

are

still

common

in

northern

European

industrial

buildings.

The twice

yearly

washing

with

lye

soap

is

almost

palpable

in the

light,

scrubbed surface

-

a

surface that

is

clean but

somehow

never

finished.

Anshelm

was

proud

of the

flexibility

and often

exploited

potential

of the

building s

suspended

floor,

but it is its

rawness,

its

presence

as

structure,

that

most

powerfully

contributes

to

the

provisional

and

open-ended character of the art space.

Along

with the

floor,

the

hundreds of domed

roof

lights

are

the

most

significant

tectonic

element of the

gallery

interior.

White-painted plywood

sheets,

fragile

and

thin,

have

been stressed into

a

slightly

concave

shape

to

form the

interior of the

lights.

The

stressing

of the surface

gives

a

consistent

shape

to

the

hundreds

of

domes and is

evident

from the

exposed

corner

L

clamps

and the

gaps

at

the

edges

of the sheets

that

hint

at

a

hidden

volume above. The

air-supply

diffuser,

socket

outlet and

simple exposed lightbulbs

further

emphasize

that

this

is

an

independent

floating

layer, enclosing

a

structure

and services

zone,

rising

up

to meet

the

glazing

elements

and

providing

a

ceiling

to

the

gallery.

What could

easily

have

been

a

case

of

too

many

things

happening

in

too

small

a

space,

instead becomes

a

surface

of

great

control and

delicacy,

radiant with

an

ethereal,

almost

Islamic

light.

As is the case inmany other temporary exhibition

galleries,

the

wall

linings

at

Malrno have

a

provisional

and used

quality

-

timber boards that have

obviously

been

repeatedly

overpainted,

cracked

joints

at

times

separating

and

coming

out

of

plane.

While

such

details

are

distracting

and

might

seem

to

be defects in

other

buildings,

here

they

are

consistent with the

whole,

quietly

proclaiming

the robust

flexibility

of this

art

space.

You

can

do

a

lot

to

this

space

without

negating

its

quiet dignity, itsparticular character of

place.

There is

very

little

about the Malm? Konsthall

that is

literally

like

a

garage,

warehouse

or

factory.

Structure is

completely

hidden,

servicing

elements

are

discretely

and

flexibly

integrated

into the

simple

linings

which form

the interior. There is

no

hint of

making

a

representation,

or

pastiche,

of

an

industrial

space.

Instead,

Anshelm has

made

a

space

of

an

equivalent

character,

a

place

for

production,

a

place

that can be

robustly

engaged

with and altered.

above:

Model

by

Klas

Anshem;

the

gallery

at

night; gallery

interior.

34

AA

FILES

41







Olle

Svedberg

In

1970

Sigurd

Lewerentz moved

next

door

to

Klas

Anshelm. At the older architect s

request

Anshelm

(1914-80) designed a small atelier in Lewerentz s

garden.

In

order

to

satisfy

the

requirement

that

no

one

should be able

to

look

at

Lewerentz while he

worked,

Anshelm

produced

a

black box of asfaboard

with windows

in

the roof alone.

Anshelm shared this

liking

for

privacy.

He

too

was aman

of few

words

and

retiring

habits.

Only occasionally

did he

display

visible eccentricities such

as

driving

around

in

a

huge

1930s

Horch cabriolet

(a

demonstration, also,

of his

financial

success).

Most

of the

buildings

designed by

Anshelm

-

about

one

hundred

in

all

-

are

located

in

and around

the

town

of

Lund,

in

southern Sweden.

Having

moved there

shortly

after his

graduation

from

Chalmers School of Architecture

in

G?teborg

(1940),

he established his

own

office

(1947)

and remained

in

the

town

for the

rest

of his life.

In

general,

Anshelm

stuck

to

the

design principles

of the

1940s

and the

majority

of his

buildings

are

large

brick

structures

that

repeat

more or less the same formula. But he also

designed

a

number of villas and cultural institutions

in

a

highly

individual

style. Amongst

these

are

the

Malm?

Konsthall

(1973)

and

a

somewhat older

art

gallery

in

Lund

(1956).

Prior

to

the construction of theKonsthall the

only

venue

in

Malm?

that

was

capable

of

holding

large

exhibitions

was an

old

museum

located

some

way

from the

town centre.

The

city s

cultural

reputation

was poor in comparison to Stockholm, G?teborg and

even

the

nearby university

town

of Lund. Conse?

quently,

during

the late

1960s,

there

was an

urgent

need for a new art gallery that would be more in

keeping

with Malm? s

status

as

Sweden s third

largest

city (inhabited by

approximately

250,000

people).

The

costs,

size and site of the Malm?

project

were

pre-determined

-

the

new

building

would be erected

on

an

area

of flat land

in

the south-western

corner

of

the old

town.

On

the

western

side

of this

space

was an

informal

park

and,

hidden behind

some

trees,

a

semi

classical edifice of the

1940s

-

the

big

Town Theatre

designed by Sigurd

Lewerentz.

Buildings

of various

ages

(themajority

of which

are

red-brick

structures

of

the

early

nineteenth

century)

stood

on

the

eastern

and

northern

edges

of

the site

-

one

of

these,

a

small

school

building,

was

converted into

an

office and

store,

and connected

to

the

rear

of the

new

gallery.

To

the

south

there

was a

parking

area.

Anshelm s

response

to

these conditions

was a

low,

rectangular building

of

concrete.

Its external features

were

dominated

by

a

glass

wall that faced the

park

and

by

a

huge triangular

lantern. The entrance - a

portico

of

red-painted

I-beams

-

faced south and

projected

at

a

450

angle

from the wall. To hide the

parking

area a

simple

formal

garden

was

arranged

near

the

entrance.

Nearby,

a

long

bench

was

fixed

to

the wall

to

catch the

sun.

As

a

final

touch,

Anshelm

intended

to

have the

outer

concrete

walls

covered

by

ivy,

instead of

leaving

them

in

the

rough

Brutalist

state

that

they

are

in

today.

Inside, the visitor encountered an open, white

right:

The main entrance.

AA FILES

41

35







washed

hall

(75

x

30

m).

Its floor

was

constructed

of

unpainted

spruce

boards with

exposed

nails;

the

10

metre-high

lantern

was

surrounded

by

a

number of

smaller

ones.

It

looked like

a

workshop

or

factory

rather than a temple of art and the reaction to this

was as one

might

have

expected:

sharp

criticism

from

conservatives;

enthusiastic

acclaim from

young

left

wing

radicals.

But Anshelm

always

regarded

his

own

left-wing sympathies

as

something

to

be discussed

in

private,

he

never

intended

the

gallery

to

be

a

political

arena

-

his

workshop

concept

was

merely

an

architect s

response

to

artistic

problems

of

the

day.

In

addition

to

being

an

architect,

Anshelm also

made

non-figurative

sculptures,

artefacts

as

he called

them.Whilst

designing

theMalm?

Konsthall,

he was

planning

an

exhibition of these works

(ranging

from

obsolete

pieces

of old

cars

to

geometrical

illustrations

for arithmetical

problems

and models

for

large-scale

water

fountains)

at

the

art

gallery

in

Lund that

Anshelm had

designed

in

1956.

The

spaces

in

that

gallery,

he

now

thought,

were

difficult

to

use

-

too

limited and

too

divided

-

and

as

a

result,

Anshelm s

design

forMalm? became

an

open,

undivided

hall.

The site at Lund had been a rectangular market?

place

with brick

buildings

on

either

side,

one

being

a

small,

detached

medieval house with

stepped gables.

In Anshelm s

initial

sketches

the

gallery s

plan

was

faithfully

adjusted

to

the traditional

courtyard

struc?

ture

-

four blocks

framing

a

closed

right-angled

area

-

but

gradually

the

design

became

more

free

and

open

in character.

Ultimately

even

the trademark

red-brick

facade

was

altered.

This modernization

was

in

part

due

to two

younger

members

of Anshelm s

staff,

Bernt

Nyberg

and Stefan

Romare,

who

belonged

to

the

movement

against

New

Empiricism

and its

pitched

roofs,

ornamental

surfaces,

mixed colours

and materials.

This

style

was

typical

of

the

1940s,

and

was

intended

to create

a

popular

and

national architecture

as

opposed

to

the

functionalism

of the

pre-war

decades.

Anshelm s

own

rejection

of

ornament

and

multi?

coloured effects attracted

his

young

colleagues (to

whom such

things

were

nothing

but sentimental

kitsch).

Belonging

to

the

same

generation

as

the

Smithsons

and Team

X,

Nyberg

and Romare looked

back

on

radical

modernism with

admiration.

They

inspired

Anshelm

to

change

the

brick

box and

to

reorganize

both the

interior

and the

exterior,

transforming

the latter into

an

almost

de

Stijl-like

composition

of horizontal

and vertical window

strips.

The

large

windows

and

stepless

entrance

made

access

to the gallery much easier, and in doing so furthered

the

aims of

social-democratic

politics:

to

eliminate

traditional cultural

barriers

and

bring

modern

art

to

the

people.

Inside,

the

Lund

Art

Gallery

was

lit

by large

36

The small roof

lanterns,

main

entrance

porch

and

door handles at

the

Malm? Konsthall.

The

exterior

and

main entrance door

handles of the Lund Konsthall.

AA

FILES

41







above:

Malm?

Konsthall,

plan

and

section with

proportions

indicated

by

the

author.

AA FILES

41

lanterns borrowed from

one

of Anshelm s earlier

projects

-

the industrial halls

at

Landskrona built

for

the Landsverk

Company.

The construction of the

lanterns

was

simple:

a

section

of flat roof

was

cut

out,

raised

to

an

angle

and the

resultant

gap

filled

with

glass.

At Lund these lanterns

cover

two

large

halls

that

run

parallel

to

the

facade.

Whilst these

halls

are

two

full

storeys

in

height,

the

connecting

structures

are divided into two one storey spaces. The delicate

variations between

bigger

and smaller

rooms

with

different

light

conditions

give

the Lund

gallery

a

spatial quality

that Anshelm

never

achieved

again.

Yet it

was

precisely

these divisions and

variations that

proved

to

be

an

obstacle

to

preparing

his

own

exhibition

in

1972.

At Malm?

Anshelm did

not

find it

easy

to create

a

solution

to

these

problems

-

a

single,

large

room

with

an

even,

natural

light.

Even

though

the Malm?

Konsthall

was a

detached

building, light

had

to

come

from

above,

since

the walls

were

reserved for

hanging

works of

art,

and

a

large

lantern

of the Landskrona

type

could

illuminate

only

a

small

part

of the

enormous room.

The

remainder would

have

to

be

lit

in

some

other

way.

Anshelm,

who had often said architecture

cannot

be

invented ,

now

had

to

be

inventive. He constructed

a

small lantern

angled slightly

to

the north

and

by

setting 230 of these side by side, he created a ceiling of

pure

light.

Anshelm took

great

pains

to

find the

right

lean,

proportion

and

curve

of

the

lanterns,

which

were

made of

plywood,

and

his hard work

paid

off

the

light

is

perfectly

even

in

every

part

of the

oblong

room.

It is

a

soft

light

which

counteracts

the hard

exterior

of the

building

-

anything

you

might

associate with

theword concrete is

swept

away

the

very

second

you

step

inside,

with

no

vestibule

or

mediating

space

to

break

the

contrast.

In

its ideal

configuration

-

without

partition

walls,

without works

of

art

or

equipment

-

it consists

of

nothing

but

light.

Anshelm often began the design process with a

square.

He would then add another

square,

a

half

square

or

whatever else

was

needed,

making

use

of

a

classical

grid

system.

One should

not

be

aware

of the

grid

at

the end of

the

process

and

to

achieve this it

has

to

be distorted.

At Malm? the

plan

is almost

two

and

a

quarter

squares,

the

large

lantern

is almost

as

high

as

it iswide

-

a

pattern

that is

repeated

throughout

the

design.

The result

is

calm

and

steady

without

making

the

geometry

feel dead.

Simple

as

thismethod

may

seem,

it

must

be handled with

great

subtlety

and

this

was one

ofAnshelm s

great

talents.

Anshelm s achievement

at

Malm?

was

recognized

in

1976,

when the

building

was

awarded the Svenska

Arkitekters Riksf?rbund s

highest

honour,

the

Kasper

Salin Prize. The

prize

was

awarded for the

building s

refreshing informality.

An

open

space

without

barriers of

any

kind,

it

imposes

no

style,

whether old

or

new,

foreign

or

national. The

building

has

no

regional character and not even the slightest con?

nection

to

its

surroundings,

yet

it fits into its

disordered location

perfectly,

thanks

to

its

easy

appeal

and harmonious

proportions.

37







Sune

Nordgren

The

Malm?

Konsthall

is

a

building

constructed of

basic materials

-

it is

a

concrete

box

with

a

wooden

floor, white walls and beautiful light. But it is also a

blank

sheet,

open

to

all kinds of artistic

creativity,

born

in

a

time when the

contemporary

art

it

was

designed

to

house could

assume

any

shape

and

use

any

material

in

a

continuous

experiment

with

new

means

of

expression.

This

was

also

a

time when

accessibility

and

flexibility

were

highly

esteemed

words.

At

Malm?,

the

promise

of these words

has

been

realized

in

a

building

which,

over

the

years,

has

genuinely proved

its

ability

to

adapt

to

all kinds

of

new

art

works

-

performances,

installations,

multi?

media and interactive works

-

whilst

maintaining

a

capacity

to

display

more

traditional

art.

As

a

result,

the Konsthall

provides

an

atmosphere

that is

very

welcoming

and unfettered

by

pretensions

to

prestige.

Many

obvious

obstacles,

both

physical

and intel?

lectual,

to

the

engagement

with

challenging

works of

contemporary

art

are

easily

overcome

because

of the

simplicity

and evident

presence

of the

building.

Whilst theKonsthall is

easy

and

rewarding

for its

staff

to

work

in,

it is artists

in

particular

who love the

space

and this is

perhaps

because it has been

designed

to

be the ideal artist s studio.

Indeed,

as

he

designed

the

Konsthall,

Klas Anshelm had

a

particular

artist s

studio

in

mind

-

that which Constantin

Brancusi had

built

in

Paris with his

own

hands

(and

which Anshelm

probably

saw

in

itsmeticulous reconstruction

at

Musee

d Art Moderne de

la

Ville).

Brancusi

frequently

took

photographs

in his

studio and

looking

at

them

you

easily

recognize

all the

basic elements of

the

Malm?

Konsthall: the proportions of the studio have been

repeated (though

on

a

much

bigger

scale)

and

one can

also

find

the

same

very

high ceiling

with

large

north

facing

windows.

Anshelm

expressed

the view that since

most

art

is created

in

very

simple

rooms

-

studios

or

rough

factories

-

it should be exhibited

in

similarly

simple

spaces.

One of his

most

commendable

achievements

at

theKonsthall is that he has

managed

to create

a

studio

or

workshop atmosphere

that,

despite

its

enlargement,

has retained

a

human scale.

To

everyone

working

in

this

arts

factory

and

to

all

those who visit

it,

this

immediately

establishes

a

direct

connection

to

the

artwork.

The Malm? Konsthall

was

both

a

controversial

and

a

popular place

from the

start.

When

I

arrived

as

its third director

(in early

1990)

this

simple building

was

in

immediate need of

renovation,

having

been

more

than well used

by

over

two

million visitors

during

its first fifteen

years.

Over

that

time,

the

wooden floor had never had

any proper

maintenance,

basic

structures

were

completely neglected,

the

in

house

restaurant

had made the

ceiling

greasy,

the

roof

was

leaking

and the

simple glass

lantern

panels

made

the

whole

space

a

greenhouse

on

sunny

summer

days.

Sometimes itwould

get

so

hot that

the

exhibitions

had

to

be closed

to

the

public.

The

thorough

restoration and extension that took

place

between

1993

and

1994

(and

for which

I

was

left:

The

gallery

following

the

restoration in 1994.

AA FILES

41







above:

The

gallery during

exhibitions of

work

by

Bard

Breivik

(left)

and

by

Andres

Serrano

(right),

both of which

took

place

in

1996.

AA FILES

41

responsible)

has since

been both

praised

and criti?

cized.

I

began

in

February

1990,

working

with

Jan

Holmgren

fromWhite Architects in

Malm?,

and

by

August

of

the

same

year

we

had made the first

presentation

of

plans

and sketches. The

renovation

was an

attempt

to

restore

the

building

in

line with

Anshelm s

original

intentions

(as

far

as we

could

read them from his

early

drawings),

and also

to

liberate the

building

from

increasingly

intrusive

activities,

among

which

were

a

growing

restaurant,

a

profitable

bookshop

and

a

permanent

auditorium.

Since the realization of a building is always a process

that

involves

a

series of

compromises (in

this

case,

not

only

with

engineers

and

politicians

but also with the

first director

of theMalm?

Konsthall,

Eje H?gest?tt)

what those

original

intentions

and activities

actually

were

is

a

matter

that

might

merit

some

discussion.

Ultimately,

however,

in

all its

essential

aspects

the

extensive

renovation

was a

real

success,

adding

much

needed

space

and

public

facilities

to

the Konsthall.

The

integrity

of the

building

was

not

only

maintained

but also

emphasized,

and the

building

was

finally

given

the total

flexibility

that

was

of

fundamental

concern

to

its architect.

It

was

important

for

us

to

keep

the

very

strong

and

beautiful

entrance,

so

that the obvious and direct

route

into the

art

space

was

not

confused

and

to

maintain

a

sense

of

easy

accessibility

without the

hindrance of

thresholds,

whether mental

or

physical.

Thus,

even

though

the

building

as a

whole is

set

away

from the

busy

streets and

pedestrian

areas of the town

centre,

we

immediately

agreed

not to

change

anything

on

the exterior.

(This

means

that each of the

250,000

people

who

visit

the Konsthall

every year

have made

a

conscious decision

to

go

there.)

The

roof

however,

was

in

desperate

need of

restoration. We

installed double

glazing

in

the

520

lanterns and

opened

up

the

high light

shaft

(without

changing

its

shape

or

appearance).

These

lanterns,

derived from

Anshelm s

design

for

a

factory

in

the

early

1950s,

have

become

one

of his

most

characteristic

signatures.

Naturally,

we

retained Anshelm s fantastic

solu?

tion

to

problems

of

space

-

the

ability

to

open up

large

parts

of the floor

and

expose

the basement.

The

architect himself

never

missed

an

opportunity

to

emphasize this aspect of his design. When he was

invited

to

exhibit

at

the

Konsthall,

his vertical

Pendulum

Project

used the full

height

of the

building

plus

the

opened

basement. This

unique

feature has

since been used

by

artists

such

as

Daniel

Buren,

Robert

Morris,

Miroslaw Balka

and Anish

Kapoor.

The

spaces necessary

for

the

generation

of

revenue

and the

provision

of

education

-

bookshop,

restaurant,

children s

workshop

and

auditorium

-

were

moved

to

the

empty

house

next

door and

connected

to

the

now

purified

exhibition hall

by

a

beautiful

annex,

an

interspace

with

tempting shop

windows

facing

the

main entrance.

Today

theMalm? Konsthall is

one

of

Europe s

best

spaces

for

temporary

exhibitions. It is

wonderful

to

work

in

-

simple

materials allow

partitions

to

blend

with real

walls;

you

can

drill

or

nail

into

the solid

wooden

floor; you

can

easily

support

heavy

sculptures

from beneath and direct

cabling

wherever

you

wish. It

is a true

workshop

that can

adjust

to

any

expression

of

contemporary

art.

It is

a

container for

ideas,

friendly

and

welcoming, totally

accessible,

simple

and

straight?

forward,

a

meeting

place

where

nothing

is

impossible.

39





Olgiati Works concepts

Documents

Transcript of Olgiati Works concepts