Mies’s German Pavilion as an Expression of Modernism

Constructed for the International Exhibition of 1929, Mies van der Rohe’s German Pavilion at Barcelona was designed “to represent Germany’s openness, liberality, modernity and internationalism” at the conclusion of World War I. With its logical free plan, glass and marble walls, steel supports and lack of ornamentation, it embodied the principles of architectural modernism. An object of simple serenity for those living in the perils of a chaotic post-war nation, the structure provided an opportunity for reflection to those seeking a new national direction. The pavilion’s modernism was perhaps best exemplified through its technique. It “consisted of a rectangular slab roof supported by steel columns, beneath which free-standing planes of Roman travertine, marble, onyx and glass of various hues were placed to create the feeling of space beyond.” Noted for its austerity, the lack of ornamentation signaled the rejection of a corrupt imperial regime and the classical structures associated with it. Mies instead intended to develop a new form of modern architecture appropriate for an impending industrial democracy. For it was his aesthetic belief that “architectural beauty resides in the simple, spare, almost chaste execution of a logical system.” “The boldest contribution of orthodox modern architecture was the development of what has been called ‘flowing space’…This kind of space produced an architecture of related planes, horizontal and vertical.” One of the key modernist features employed in the German Pavilion was this logically rational floor plan. It “engaged its site through the careful contrast between the long travertine walls, the roof slab, and the unbroken palace wall,” subdividing the space with steel columns. The German Pavilion also showcased a modernist approach to the use of materials. Each showcased component was fully unmasked and served a distinct purpose. “The pavilion is undoubtedly one of the best examples of design excellence and the paramount importance of the quality of materials- there are no superfluous or ‘false’ surfaces, only expressed materials and their simple and timeless beauty.” The stylistic innovation of the pavilion marked yet another step forward. “The architecture of Germany at that time was primarily of the architecture of the workman, of public housing directed to the problems of the politically ‘revolutionary’ country.” Applying a drastically new design concept, Mies created a structure demonstrative of the openness and modernity Germany strived for. (It should be noted, however, while this represented a stylistic leap, the associated risk was quite low, as the building was not part of the German landscape and essentially served no functional purpose.) The “German Pavilion was a masterpiece of the ‘International Style’ precisely because it brought together as a harmony the American compulsion toward that Open Road which allows of no conclusion and the deeply seated European instinct for defined permanence and enclosure.” Fusing these two distinct ideals- the American most clearly seen in the building’s transparency, the European, in the box-like structure- Mies was able to quench the German desire for internationalism. Within this fusion laid a distinctly Miesian style, whose influences were traceable while its own ideals remained ambiguous, openly inviting interpretation from a nation navigating the path of uncharted direction. Mies van der Rohe’s German Pavilion was constructed to visually convey the qualities idealized by the downtrodden nation of Germany following the First World War. These ideals were imparted through modernist principles- lack of ornamentation, a free, open plan, and glass, marble, and steel structures- to deliberately disassociate with the classical styling associated with the failed imperial regime. The pavilion represented “ a new system of freedom and order, but one which acted within a restricted emotional frame…without a single focus or fixed conclusion.”

Works Cited

“Barcelona Pavilion.” Archiseek. 2007.

Bate, Pam. “I wish I’d done that.” Building Design, 25 Nov. 2005. p. 19.

Davis, Morris. “Miesian Beauty in Behavioral Research.” Ethics, Vol. 77, No. 4. (Jul., 1967). p. 289.

Harrington, Kevin. “Bauhaus Symposium.” Design Issues, Vol. 5, No. 1. (Autumn, 1988). p. 56.

Hays, Michael K. “Critical Architecture: Between Culture and Form.” Perspecta, Vol. 21. (1984). p. 18.

“Mies van der Rohe Dies at 83.” New York Times. 19 Aug. 1969 .

Scully, Jr., Vincent J. “Modern Architecture.” College Art Journal, Vol. 17, No. 2. (Winter, 1958). pp. 147-148.

Venturi, Robert. “Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture: Selections from a Forthcoming Book.” Perspecta, Vol. 9. (1965). p. 21.