Jump to content

User:Swong13

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Milwaukee Art Museum: Engineered Motion

The form of movement is both complex and widely applicable as it serves as the primary function behind any action that is performed. Yet, movement and its poetics are not solely contained to human life: it flows in the design and realization of structural art. This intangible but prevalent concept is what defines the Milwaukee Art Museum, recently renovated in 2001 by world-renowned architect and engineer Santiago Calatrava. Unique in its form, the renovations are powerful and expressive, evoking emotion, elegance, and most importantly, movement. While the renovation was criticized due to outrageous cost and impracticality, Calatrava created an engineering marvel, a true piece of structural art that has influenced society and the economy of Milwaukee while capturing the beauty and creativity of movement.

Calatrava’s innovative design created a technological and unconventional building that is a true engineering and structural masterpiece. During the design and competition phase of the project, Calatrava decided that the best design would consist of a large glass hall and a brise soleil that would rise majestically overhead. Calatrava envisioned the brise soleil as the wings of a moving bird with the capabilities of engineered motion. This movement of the wings is achieved through the driving of motors that move the cantilevered fins of different lengths to various angles and heights. The sequence of the opening of the brise soleil takes a few minutes, starting from its closed position and then opening up to a wingspan of 32 meters, such that the longest fin remains parallel to the ground[1]. Equally as impressive is the cantilever-spared cable-stayed bridge that appears to defy gravity. With its pylon tilted at forty-seven degrees, the cables hold up the slender bridge over the road below while the weight of the bridge works as a counterbalance[2]. Science and innovation played crucial roles in creating the entire museum as it required precise work and custom construction. Most of the building had to be completed on site and previous structural concepts and building practices proved to be either insufficient or inadequate for the quality and craftsmanship that was needed[3]. As for materials, Calatrava relied on reinforced concrete while using the strength of steel for support, demonstrating that the structural materials are a method of load transfer and an example of the new possibilities of design[4]. Scientifically, the renovations were innovative and structurally complex as new forms took into account inventive, specific, and custom engineering.

Yet, while the renovations were scientifically and technically innovative, the efficiency of the design and the construction process were poor. Just focusing on the cost efficiency, the renovation ended at over $100 million (up from $35 million)[5] and some critics have linked this economically inefficient figure to Calatrava’s extravagant, tasteless, and sculpture-first artistic designs[6]. There were also concerns that the building would not be able to pay for itself, sit idly by the lake, or fail to attract enough people. However, in recent years, attendance has increased, helping pay for the high cost of structure and the debt left over from the project[7]. Along with the cost so high, the design was also inefficient regarding the amount of material and some artistic expressions. The Quadracci Pavilion, while spacious and open, is an architecture feature, a creation that serves a specific function. However, architecture does not translate into efficiency as the load path of the forces is not clear nor does the structure utilize minimal material. The entire brise soleil is a sculpture piece that serves no load baring functions. As such, the design of the renovations is inefficient cost-effectively and structurally since the outrageously expensive building is unable to carry load in the most direct route and adds dead load due to sculpturing.

Struggling at first to attract people and recognition, the renovations have changed social and economic dynamics that continue today as powerful influences on the city of Milwaukee. As a social location, the building creates a gathering place, a tourist destination, and a form of artistic expression. For the people of Milwaukee and those visiting the city, the Milwaukee Art Museum is a conversation piece, a means of sparking interest and social interactions. At the same time, there have been strong economic effects due to the renovation; construction of the museum was primarily performed by local Milwaukee companies because of their strong craftsmanship and proximity[8], thus aiding the local economy. As a new destination, the renovations have created a new icon for Milwaukee as the striking museum has become a landmark, an award-winner, a public area. Logically, the cable-stayed bridge, which serves as a public pedestrian link, provides a vital connection between the downtown and the lakefront[9]. Milwaukee, a former Midwest manufacturing center and continuously losing industries, has embraced the change as the pedestrian link from the museum to the downtown has helped revitalize the museum and the downtown[10]. Connected to the downtown by the bridge, the building beckons for people to move and be moved, to take in the beauty of the scenery, interact with others, and spend time in the vicinity. The social and economic effects have been profound as Milwaukee has become a hub for culture and a center for new investment.

With engineering, economics, and social aspects aside, the Milwaukee Art Museum is a work of art, a structure that captures the imagination of motion and the grace of beauty. Composed mainly of concrete and glass, the building has an aura of lightness, delicately placed in a spectacular location. Inside, “the pavilion transcends the geometry, materials, and volumes of the existing buildings to redefine the museum’s identity.”[11] Outside, the white-painted wings of the brise soleil are inviting and create a sense of weightlessness that is tied directly to the cable-stayed bridge. Producing a sense of movement, the seemingly permanent building appears to be continuously changing, evoking a new emotion depending on the perspective and the function. When asked about incorporating movement into the design, Calatrava responded “Because it is possible, and because it is possible, it is a part of our time.”[12] Yet, simultaneously, the “building moves people,”[13] an attribution that speaks to the elegance and symbolism of the museum. As a piece of architecture, it is poetic. As a piece of structural art, it is dynamic.

An engineering marvel, the Milwaukee Museum is ingenious and unique, incorporating new designs that while creative, did prove to be inefficient regarding load and cost. At the same time, the vital link ranging from the shoreline and building to downtown, has become a social gathering place and means for economic capital flow. Elegant and soaring, the museum is a symbol of grace and beauty that evokes movement and emotion. In the end, the inefficiency due to cost and load path is not significant enough to detract from the firm evaluation that Milwaukee Art Museum is structural art. And as civil engineering moves forward, the unique combination of architecture and engineering will persist as the time for structural art has never been more ideal and the opportunities for its movement are potent and vast.

  • View of the Milwaukee Art Museum at night.
    View of the Milwaukee Art Museum at night.
  • The Milwaukee Art Museum viewed from downtown across the bridge.
    The Milwaukee Art Museum viewed from downtown across the bridge.
  • The Milwaukee Art Museum as viewed from the South displaying the brise soleil, cable-stayed bridge, and underground parking garage.
    The Milwaukee Art Museum as viewed from the South displaying the brise soleil, cable-stayed bridge, and underground parking garage.
  • Inside the Milwaukee Art Museum
    Inside the Milwaukee Art Museum
  1. ^ Tzonis, Alexander (2004). Santiago Calatrava: The Complete Works. New York: Rizzoli. p. 290.
  2. ^ Tzonis, Alexander (1999). Santiago Calatrava: The Poetics of Movement. New York: Universe. p. 204.
  3. ^ Kent, Cheryl (2005). Santiago Calatrava: The Milwaukee Art Museum. New York: Rizzoli. p. 55.
  4. ^ Bowman, Russell (2001). Building a Masterpiece: The Milwaukee Art Museum. New York: Hudson Hills Press. p. 38.
  5. ^ Keny, Cheryl (2005). Santiago Calatrava: The Milwaukee Art Museum. New York: Rizzoli. pp. 46, 93.
  6. ^ Rose, Steve. "The Gaudi Effect". The Guardian. Retrieved 11 March 2012.
  7. ^ Antlfinger, Carrie. "Art Museums Deal with Attendance After Expansions". USA Today. Retrieved 11 March 2012.
  8. ^ Kent, Cheryl (2005). Santiago Calatrava: The Milwaukee Art Museum. New York: Rizzoli. p. 55.
  9. ^ Bowman, Russell (2001). Building a Masterpiece: Milwaukee Art Museum. New York: Rizzoli. p. 35.
  10. ^ Kent, Cheryl (2005). Santiago Calatrava: The Milwaukee Art Museum. New York: Rizzoli. p. 25.
  11. ^ Tzonis, Alexander (1999). Santiago Calatrava: The Poetics of Movement. New York: Universe. p. 204.
  12. ^ Kent, Cheryl (2005). Santiago Calatrava: The Milwaukee Art Museum. New York: Rizzoli. p. 93.
  13. ^ Kent, Cheryl (2005). Santiago Calatrava: The Milwaukee Art Museum. New York: Rizzoli. p. 23.

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Milwaukee_Art_Museum http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Structural_art

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User:Swong13&oldid=481612561"