Tate Gallery of Modern Art

A private exhibition space or a public event?

Kingston University 2010/2011
Faculty of Art, Design & Architecture AR3020. DISSERTATION
School of Architecture & Landscape A CRITICAL BUILDING STUDY

BA (Hons) Architecture Module Leader: Irina Davidovici

Level 6 Supervisor: Christoph Lueder

Myrto Kamari
K0822741
2
An Outline

Introduction
There will be a short presentation of the building, providing essential information to
the reader, in order to be smoothly introduced to this case study. The author‟s
focal point, considerations for public life and the importance of the physical
experience in H&dM‟s proposal for Tate Gallery of Modern Art, will also be set here,
as well as the way it is going to be analysed, the structure of the dissertation, that
is.

Chapter One – The Context

Location of the building within its surroundings. Characteristics of each
geographical space will be presented, in terms of time and culture, order to
construct the full picture of the scheme‟s time in general. What were the
architectural trends and how were we led to a boom of art exhibition spaces?

Chapter Two – Meeting the achitects

Architectural ideas both general and specific to the Tate Modern‟s proposal and
other works.

Chapter Three – Collaboration with and influences by artists

The close relationship of the practice with the artistic community examined
through the former‟s works.

Chapter Four – Changing uses

Transformation of the old Bankside Power Station into what it is today. References
to H&dM‟s strategic movements aiming to attain coherence throughout.

Conclusion
The author will try to specify the utter significance of this building from a social
aspect regarding the local and probably the global community. What does it
convey to the world? Were there any future cultural projects influenced by it?

3
 Contents

Outline 3
Introduction 5
Chapter One - The Context 8
1.1 Location and Surroundings 8
1.2 Historical Context 9
1.3 Social Context 11
Chapter Two 17
2.1 Introductions 17
2.2 Other works and architectural ideas 17
Chapter Three 25
3.1 Donald Judd 26
3.2 Joseph Beuys 26
3.3 Rémy Zaugg 27
3.3 Dan Graham 28
Chapter Four 34
4.1 The Pre-existing building‟s background 35
4.2 Description of the Pre-existing building 35
4.3 Dealing with the existing 36
Conclusion 46

4
 Introduction

Since its realisation in London on the turn of the Millennium, the Tate Gallery of
Modern Art has engaged the attention of many around the globe; partly because
of the architectural qualities it conveys and partly due to its role as a kind of
archetype within the discourse of art spaces. The architects, Herzog & de Meuron,
retaining a long-term relationship with the modern artistic world, ventured to
visualise what had been in papers described as the ideal art exhibition space. The
result, as they would put it, is a full experience rather than just a personal stylistic
idea materialised. The protagonist is the visitor and not the architect or even the
art displayed.

Examining the building under this scope, it is essential to present the setting of this
invention. It was not a flash of inspiration, but the outcome of a series of
developing conditions. First of all, during the last decades of the 20th century there
was a significant political and socio-economic twist. The advancement of
technology encouraged the implementation of large infrastructure works, which
were accompanied by high-rise building and corporate architecture. Along came
the need for redefining cities‟ focal points. Culture, with its high ideals, more
compatible with that time‟s zeitgeist than religion was, became the new absolute.
Markets became more involved in art, especially modern, which got to know
great appreciation. Consequently, a number of spectacular „art cathedrals‟
started to rise, as places for free expression of elevated notions. Beside artists,
architects too began to distinguish their works related to this trend as independent
pieces of art. It appeared as if there was a competition between the exhibition
spaces and the exhibited objects. The outcome of this period, which at times is still
unfolding into present, was a very sculptural and complex architecture,
characterised be irregular shapes, shiny materials and massive volumes. In addition
to the above, an important milestone was approaching, the Millennium. This was a
fresh argument for projects of grand extend in all aspects. For Britain of the same
date, building a museum for modern art had a symbolic notability of triple effect.
Principally, it would be the first cultural project after the Royal National Theatre,
which opened in 1976, and a conservative Thatcherian epoch that followed.
5
Furthermore, it would classify Britain among those countries that already had
prestigious modern cultural monuments. And, not to be overlooked, it would be a
power show-off at this worth-remembering moment, along with other impressive
national projects.

Severe criticism towards the selection of site and building to

accommodate such a grandiose plan by the Tate Trustees
was something to be expected. The deserted Bankside Power
Station lain to the downgraded area of Southwark did not
seem to match the ambitions of the public regarding a
millennium project. Nevertheless, it was to the advantage of
the Tate and the whole cultural community, that the director
of the institution, Sir Nicholas Serota (fig.1), descried this
industrial behemoth as of powerful potential. His contribution
Figure 1. Nicholas Serota
throughout the realisation of this idea is remarkable. Having
located the site, it was his job to convince the Tate Trustees about its
appropriateness. It was also him who visualised the new venue as something
simple but vigorous, analogous to what modern art represents. Beyond the
conceptual parameters though, he had to deal with financial issues too. He had to
find donators and allies for the project and generally raise the funds. Except for the
site, he also traced the architects that would deliver the emprise, within a list of
high-profile firms. That was quite a risk, since the origins of the practice were non-
British and its reputation relatively confined among the British. He thus had to
introduce -at least- the Trustees to the work of the architects, so that they would
too vote for them. When the project began, he initiated an assertive
communication policy, in order for the event to gain publicity. His main target was
to make the oncoming venue the new attraction of the country and not only. Last
but not least, it was him who supported architects‟ vision to the very end, even at
times of doubt and conflict within the construction team.

The completion of this project was finally embraced even by the least enthusiastic.
Its value lies to the fact that it managed to regenerated the long-forgotten
adjacent community. Strategic design gestures gave Southwark a descent face to

6
the riverfront and linked it to the City, a London area which had lost its former
prestige by that time.

7
Chapter One
The Context

1.1 Location and Surroundings

The Tate Gallery of Modern Art is located in the London Borough of Southwark.
Southwark consists of eight departments, among which, Borough and Bankside
(fig.1). This is a highly mixed-use area, covering work, living and leisure activities,
and thus being one of the most interesting urban fabric mosaics in London. The
building occupies the same site and structure as the old Bankside Power Station by
Sir Giles Gilbert Scott, exactly opposite to Christopher Wren‟s St. Paul‟s Cathedral,
between Blackfriars and Southwark Bridges, and within ten minutes walking
distance from the City, London‟s financial centre. Other public access options
include St. Paul‟s, Mansion House, London Bridge and Southwark underground
stations, as well as the boat service that runs between Tate Britain at Millbank and
Tate Modern.

The building‟s north façade is overlooking the riverfront walkway, a very busy route,
used both by tourists and locals. Part of this is the Millennium Bridge (1998-2000) by
Foster and Partners in collaboration with sculptor Anthony Caro and Arup
engineers1, connecting the Tate Modern and St. Paul‟s. The east border is
comprised of a cluster of 17th century houses with their garages, a passageway
linking the south and the north sides of the site, as well as the Shakespeare‟s Globe
Theatre. As for the south boundary, it is formed by three new structures called
Bankside 1,2,3, on the site occupied by St. Christopher‟s and Tabard Houses until
2002. The mix-use complex promotes the further development of the Bankside, by
creating a network of pedestrian streets and places that open the way from
Southwark Street to the South to the riverfront to the North 2. This development is in
line with Tate Modern‟s extension plans that focus on providing an integrated
public experience. Finally, to the West there is another group of protected

1 Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott,
(London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited, 2000), pp.22-23
2 th
http://www.townshendla.com/projects/london/bankside-26/ [accessed 10 November 2010]
8
buildings, Hopton‟s Alms Houses (fig.2), dating back to 17523. Adjacent to these
houses, a new, 12 to 24-storeys high, luxurious residential development called NEO
Bankside is currently being built by architects Rogers, Stirk, Habour & Partners4.

1.2 Historical Context

Apart from being in a key location, Tate Modern also benefited from the site‟s past
as well as the circumstances of its time.

Southwark‟s biography spans in time, starting from the point it was a significant
part of the Roman settlement of Londinium. The reason of its importance lies to the
fact that it connected Europe and south Britain to the City through the Stane and
Watling Roman Roads, and, finally, London Bridge, all extensively used by travellers
and pilgrims. Another reason for its fame was its provision of shelters entitled Inns,
which were -and still are- found along Borough High Street. Different kinds of
activities were taking place in this area, including theatre performances5, fairs,
trade6, and also crime. During the 19th century it experienced great changes in
population numbers, which rose and drop dramatically, however it remained
densely inhabited. The living standards were extremely low by that time, and
Southwark was considered to be one of the poorest parts of London. The
economy was based on tanning, food processing, printing and bookbinding, hop
trade, engineering, etc. In the next century, the number of warehouses and
wharves along the riverside hugely increased. World War II and The Blitz came to
inhibit this activity, turning a great part of the area into an abandoned industrial
site to be reconstructed a while later. Post-war era saw a fall in housing
development and traditional industry, while commercial and office facilities
flourished. Only in the 1990‟s a wave of reformation occurred, focusing on
conversion. In 1998 the pioneer developer Indi Johal transformed the unused Town

3 th
British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=65333 [accessed 10 November 2010]
4 th
NEO Bankside http://www.neobankside.com/index.php?p=home&s= [accessed 10 November 20100
5 th
The Globe and Rose Theatres live in Bankside since the late 16 century
6
Trade was taking place along the riverside and Borough Market, which was functioning as wholesale until 10am and
then as retail
9
Hall Chambers into high quality apartments7. A long series of similar conversions
followed, sometimes in a much larger scale, such as the Maidstone Buildings and
the Berkeley Homes‟ Tabard Square. At the same time, Southwark begins to gain
high reputation among tourists, who roll in to visit the Borough Market, museums,
galleries, old pubs and theatres. Especially Bankside during the last 20 years has
been characterised as cultural hub.

The former industrial community attracted all those avant-garde artists, who,
according to Swiss painter Rémy Zaugg, „want a strong place, big and tough‟.
Other examples of such a colonisation are Hoxton in London, RAW-tempel in Berlin,
Factory 798 in Beijing or even the small town of St. Ives in Cornwall, where the
„empty sail lofts, (…)(relics of a) declining fishing industry, made excellent (artist)
studios‟8. As architect Karin Templin suggests in her article „CREATIVE‟, this sub-
culture of artists, re-inventing forgotten urban zones, dates back to the 1960s New
York SoHo9. There a number of artists started renting spaces, forming associations,
and opening galleries, while, on the other hand, New Yorkers perceived the area
as a „void‟, a „non-district‟10. As a natural consequence, these areas capture
developers‟ interest, who race towards them to buy properties cheap and resell
them at least triple the initial price, usually promoting them to the prospective
buyers as „cult‟ places to live or have business in. Finally, when the masses begin to
flock, the original „inventors‟ make their way to new discoveries, because either
they can‟t afford the living costs or they crave inspiration into less refined
neighbourhoods. In Southwark‟s case, what may differ is that it has always been a
residential area apart from being an industrial one. Nevertheless, since Charles
Booth created his 1898-99 London Poverty Map, this area stood as one of the most
impecunious and least attended. Even when Sir Giles Gilbert Scott built the
Bankside Power Station, already a landmark with monumental character in its
time, conditions and public opinion about the site did not amend. On the other

7
Reilly, Leonard, The Story of the Borough, Neighbourhood History No.7 (London, London Borough of Southwark,
2009), p.111
8
Spalding, Frances, The Tate: A History (London, Tate Galley Publishing Limited, 1998), p.261
9
Templin, Karin, CREATIVE, glass magazine, issue 1: grace, spring 2010, p.225
10
Barr, Alistair, SoHo, New York: MIXED USE, DENSITY AND THE POWER OF THE MYTH,
http://www.barrgazetas.com/papers/SoHo.pdf [accessed 25th October 2010]
10
hand, since the 1940‟s there were big plans for Bankside. According to the County
of London Plan 1943:

“ 'It is one of the great anomalies of the capital that while the river, from
Westminster eastwards, is lined on the north side with magnificent
buildings and possesses a spacious and attractive embankment road,
the corresponding South Bank, excepting St Thomas' Hospital and County
Hall, should present a depressing, semi-derelict appearance'.

The area was to be redeveloped with new bridges, railways

placed underground, business premises, blocks of flats, institutions
and a cultural centre with theatre and concert hall (eventually
built as the Royal Festival Hall). The plan specifically excluded
factories and industrial premises.”11

These seem to have been finally triggered by the coming of Tate Modern.
However, the realisation of London‟s first gallery devoted to modern art was to
take place as a natural outcome of a series of international and national
occurrences.

1.3 Social Context

During the 1980‟s the international financial markets flourished and so did its art
markets. Huge amounts of money were spent on art and every other sector
somehow related to it. Concurrently, personal computers invaded the design
profession and impelled creativity. Architecture became capable of expressing
itself in ways and forms never perceived before. It was not until a year after the fall
of the stock markets in 1987 that people first confronted the notion of de-
constructivism in architecture. An exhibition directed by Philip Johnson 12 and
entitled Deconstructivist Architecture at the Museum of Modern Art in New York

11
Murrey, Stephen, The rise, fall and transformation of Bankside power station, 1890-2010, Greater London Industrial
Archaeology Society, http://www.glias.org.uk/gliasepapers/bankside.html [accessed 18th October 2010] (pp.3-4)
12
The American architect Philip Johnson along with Alfred Barr and Henry-Russell Hitchcock were responsible for
another pioneering and influential exhibition at the same museum in 1932 called The International Style: Architecture
Since 1922. This was again introducing to an ignorant public a new movement in architecture, which by that time was
modern architecture.
11
was trying to link mainly unbuilt works by Frank O. Gehry, Daniel Libeskind, Rem
Koolhaas, Peter Eisenman, Zaha Hadid, Bernard Tschumi and Coop Himmelblau13.
Their designs, focusing on forms, have been producing loud buildings that sock, by
the employment of large scale, flamboyant new materials and unprecedented
shapes that seem to freeze motion, as Gehry describes his Kurt Schwitter‟s Merzbau
in Hanover14.

The next international construction wave of the same period regarded

infrastructure, high-rise buildings and temporal structures. Due to urbanization, a
number of facilitating projects took place mostly in the developing countries and
was characterised by massiveness, not always accompanied by quality. These
secured worldwide fame for their architects, and thus the nickname „star
architect‟ (or designer) made its appearance. Such grand projects were the
Kansai airport (1987-1994) on an artificial island in Osaka by Renzo Piano, the Chep
Lap Kok (1991-1998) airport in Hong Kong by Sir Norman Foster, the Chanel Tunnel
(1988-1994) that connected Paris and London, the Torre de Collserola (1988-1992)
in Barcelona by Sir Norman Foster, the Petronas Towers (1991-1997) in Kuala Lumpur
by Cesar Pelli, and the Louvre Pyramid (1984-1989) in Paris by I.M. Pei among
others.

It was not accidental that the latter project of the above list took place in Europe.
During the 1980‟s and early 1990‟s art-related constructions were mainly dominant
in this area. As Philip Jodidio suggests this was the time when culture attempted
compensating society for the loss of the splendour and prestige of the old great
cathedrals, and thus providing the cities with new landmarks15. Except for the
Louvre Pyramid in France, another example is the glazed Carré d‟Art (1984-1993),
a mediatheque including a contemporary art gallery adjacent to a roman arena
(fig.3) at Nîmes by British Norman Foster16. The Californian star architect Frank
Gehry got his first commission in Europe in 1987, when he was assigned by the Vitra
furniture manufacturer to design its museum in Weil am Rhein. From 1991 to 1997
he also built the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao using state-of-the-art technology

13
Jodidio, Philip, NEW FORMS: ARCHITECTURE IN THE 1990s, (Köln & New York, Taschen, 1997), pp.7-8
14
Ibid, p.10
15
Ibid, p.83
16
Foster+Partners http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Projects/0344/Default.aspx [accessed 18th October 2010]
12
to attain sculptural forms (fig.4) similar to those of the Vitra Museum (fig.5). In
Germany, Frankfurt got its Museum of Modern Art (1983-1991) by Austrian Hans
Hollein. On the other hand, two equally prominent projects of the time were built in
USA and Japan respectively. The former was the curvilinear Getty Center (1984-
1997) (fig.6) in Los Angeles by Richard Meier. The latter was the Yatsushiro
Municipal Museum (1989-1991) (fig.7) in the industrial city of Kyushu by Toyo Ito.

The British could not escape this swirl of developments. Having on one hand the
new millennium approaching and on the other hand big cities of the world
displaying their astonishing art venues, it was high time to do something about it.
Under the premiership of Margaret Thatcher, it was Peter Palumbo, Chairman of
the Arts Council since 1989, who „proposed the rehabilitation of the cultural glory
to be found in Britain‟s cathedrals, churches and other public buildings, with the
intention of creating a mood of celebration to boost morale and rouse
expectations.‟17 Concurrently, a series of projects that aimed at lifting the face of
the riverfront were taking place. To name a few, the St. George Wharf housing and
office complex at Vauxhall Cross by Broadway Malyan architects, the Parliament
View commercial and residential development at Albert Embankment by EPR
architects, the Millennium Wheel and Pier enterprise at County Hall by David Marks
and Julia Barfield Architects, the Hungerford footbridge between Waterloo and
Westminster bridges by Lifschutz Davidson architects, the Charing Cross Pier at
Victoria Embankment by Seine Design, the Somerset House redeveloped as a
cultural and artistic centre building at the Strand by Peter Inskip and Peter Jenkins,
the Tourist and Information Centre at Southwark Gateway by Eric Parry Architects,
the South Bank Master Plan, targeting at revamping a 30-acre site, by Richard
Rogers Partnership, and the cylindrical Bankside Lofts at Hopton Street, to the west
of Bankside Power Station, by Piers Gough and CZWG. It would have been a
wonder if the old Power Station and its site had remained unnoticed or
unaffected.

17
Spalding, Frances, The Tate: A History (London, Tate Galley Publishing Limited, 1998), p.267
13
Figure 1. Top: Aerial view of Southbank and Bankside highlighting Tate Modern and protected buildings around it
Bottom: Southwark departments map - Borough & Bankside to the northwest corner

14
Figure 2. Alms Houses on Hopton Street (at the front) and Rogers' NEO Bankside development (at the back)

15
 Figure 4. Art as architecture or architecture as art?

Figure 3. Old and new blend together

harmoniously

Figure 5. Emblematic figure on its own can stand as

an object, probably aiming to denote its owner's
and/or its creator's non-conventional mentality

Figure 6. Looking like a cylinder in section in a controlled setting Figure 7. Its small scale aims to fit into its
humanly scaled surroundings. Considered
to be one of the most vivid examples of
Japanese architecture in the 1990’s

16
Chapter Two
Meeting the architects

2.1 Introductions

The Herzog and de Meuron architectural practice is based in Basel, Switzerland. It

was founded by Jacques Herzog and Pierre de Meuron (fig.1) in 1978, after a long-
term friendship through childhood and university years at the ETH Zurich Faculty of
Architecture. Its premises are very simple in terms of decoration and rather small.
By the time of the competition regarding the new Tate Gallery of Modern Art in
1994, two other partners had joined the firm, Harry Gugger (fig.2) in 1991 and
Christine Binswanger (fig.3) in 1994. All members participated in the early stages of
the Tate project. Christine‟s strong design skills set her in charge of the proposal
drawings. After this, Harry, who was more experienced and technologically
literate, replaced her. He was the one who was closely monitoring the construction
throughout its realisation. Pierre‟s role was to run the office back in Basel and
discuss the process with Jacques and Harry, when they were getting back from
London. Finally, Jacques was responsible for all meetings with the Tate‟s Trustees,
presentations and final decisions.

2.2 Other works and architectural ideas

When H & de M undertook the commission of Tate Modern, they had 130 works in
their portfolio. These were mostly small-scale, both private and public. In many
cases, they regarded extensions of existing structures or, either partial or full,
conversions of houses, apartments and offices, as well as many renovations.
Moreover, they had involved in a master planning, taken part in a few urban
design competitions, some of which won, designed some exhibition spaces,
museums and artist studios, contributed in exhibitions, and completed a number of
independent projects. Their career was showcasing their ability to handle a wide
range of briefs in an equally broad variety of contexts.

17
These skills and mentality could be attributed originally to Herzog‟s and de
Meuron‟s common educational place and time. Open to new stimuli, they found
intriguing the human-centric face of architecture, something that occurred after
1968. Later, with Aldo Rossi they redefined architecture, relating it to building and
only that. They learnt how to observe and interpret. In the years that followed they
distanced themselves from the blind adherence to the images, and became
„absolutely anti-representational‟18. According to Herzog, this is the opposite of
what contemporary architecture most frequently comes up with; by just copying
the historical forms, they only achieve a superficial connection to the context19. It
evolved into a concern of utmost significance that the visitors or occupiers of their
buildings would have an unpolished, physical experience of their spaces. To
achieve that, they began employing strategies appropriate for each design and
programme. A good example of this stance is the Ricola Company‟s packing and
distribution building in Mulhouse, France (1992-1993) (fig.4). The idea includes a
steel skeleton under a light-permeable polycarbonate skin. What is interesting is
the inside of the plastic panels, onto which a leaf photograph from the 1920‟s by
Karl Blossfeld has been imprinted20. The motif is repeated along the walls. Since
Ricola is fabricating herb products, one would expect that the leaf motif
symbolises the activities that take place inside the building. Nevertheless, the
specific image was not selected as a connotation to that. It was exactly what it
depicted; an immediate correlation to the adjacent garden; no latent meanings
into it. They just set an obvious question that comes to mind dealing with the
specific topography „what is a garden?‟ or „what constitutes a garden?‟, and the
answer is obvious, leaves. So, the building they construct in the garden is made of
„leaves‟.

„Pictorial analogies‟21 is a key theme in H & de M‟s work. It is the same thing when
they abnegate all architectural clichés and insist on abstaining from established
architectural styles. On the other hand, „they do not seek to invent a new

18
Kipnis, Jeffrey, ‘A conversation with Jacques Herzog (H&deM)’, EL CROQUIS, 84 (1997), p. 18
19 Wang, Wilfred, Herzog & de Meuron (Zurich, Artemis, 1992), p.143
20 http://www.ricola.com/index.cfm?uuid=980EB29A2B351571E89BB33A63B4A4B3 [accessed 20th November 2010]
21 Wang, p.143

18
language‟22; they settle with producing something that resembles to one‟s culture
original schemata, because in this way the new piece sits in a site like it has been
there forever; it is thus specific and self-evident23, like tradition. Such is the Plywood
House (1985) in Bottmingen, which is a reference to the „wooden barrack-like
buildings for kindergartens or for sports‟24 in Basel. The two are not identical, but the
pre-existing lends the new its specific form and „ordinariness‟25 no longer available.
In the same way, the rough oak floor in Tate Modern‟s galleries manages to aptly
reveal its industrial qualities, lent to it by its predecessor26.

Another important aspect in H & de M‟s work is the idea of topography. This
emerged rather as a need, given that the architects began their career amidst
the post-modernist movement. During this period, orientation within the
architectural discourse appeared to be lost, with historic and futuristic trends
asserting an equal share, as it has been brightly visualised in Ridley Scott‟s Blade
Runner27 in 1982. H & de M‟s response to that was to start giving weight to the
„entire range of features found in a specific terrain‟28, the way geologists read the
earth layers. This principle has been clearly consolidated into their Dominus Winery
project in California (1998). The „stealth winery‟29 has been fully integrated with its
environment and vineyards, forming a linear means of transition between different
soil and light condition, as seen from above. Seen from the ground level and a
distance, its gabion masses seem to disappear in the mountainous background
(fig.5). Furthermore, the basalt rocks, from the nearby canyon, that fill the gabions
protect the interior from the extreme temperatures of the region. An analogical
manner of stratification had been at the same time employed in Tate Modern‟s
planning. The scheme incorporates the topographical elements connecting
existing routes and providing new ones.

22 Wang, p.13
23 Herzog, Jacques and Pierre De Meuron, ‘Two Fields of Operation: Surfaces and Structures’ LOTUS, no.76 (1993)
p.121
24 Wang, p.143
25 Ibid
26 Herzog, Jacques, ‘Thinking of Gadamer’s Floor’, Anything, ed. by Cynthia C. Davidson (London, MIT Press, 2001),

p.115
27 Mack, Gerhard, Herzog & de Meuron: The Complete Works, vol.4: 1997-2001 (Basel, Birkhäuser Verlag AG, 2009),

p.9
28 Ibid, p.11
29 http://www.dominusestate.com/architecture.html [accessed 5th December 2010]

19
As examined above, H & de M are not afraid of following the simplest path in the
course of providing a solution. Both in terms of building forms and construction
materials, they prefer, what others call, conservative vehicles. However, once the
work is closely observed, the components lose their regularity and acquire new
qualities. This is the game of the seducer as seen in Pasolini‟s films, to which the
architects were early introduced through their studies in ETH Zurich30. In
architecture‟s case the seducer is the architect and his role is to evoke the senses
of its public. As such, the physical world takes a central position, being the medium
of experiencing an architectural space, and transforming Architecture into the
most powerful communication tool. The Goetz Gallery in Munich (1992)
materialises these ideas. The building, made of glass and timber, is a simple
rectangular box in form, consisting of three layers, which do not, however betray
the layout of the interior. The first bottom layer is a timber case half buried in the
ground, while the other half is a translucent glass envelope above ground, which
brings light to the basement. The middle layer is opaque having a matte glass
crown on its top, which again brings light to the level below through clerestories.
The impression of the building differs under changing lighting conditions, both
internal and external. Sometimes the glass appears solid making the whole
building reticent, while other times it seems as if the structure is floating31 (fig.6).
These straightforward strategies were later adapted in Tate Modern‟s design in the
form a „Light Beam‟. Resting on the top of the brick mass, other than signalling the
conversion, it provides clerestories to the galleries below, and also satisfies the
sense of vision in different ways, depending again on daylight conditions.

30Mack, Gerhard, Herzog & de Meuron: The Complete Works, vol.3: 1992-1996 (Basel, Birkhäuser, 2005), p.7
31„Gallery for a private collection of modern art, Goetz Collection, Munich, Germany, 1989-1992’, in ‘Special Issue:
Herzog & de Meuron: 1978-2002’, A+U (2002 Feb.), p.170
20
Figure 1. Jacques Herzog (left) & Pierre de Meuron (right)

Figure 2. Harry Gugger Figure 3. Christine Binswanger

21
Figure 2. Top: Ricola Mulhouse during daytime
Centre: Same building during night-time 22
Bottom: View from the interior towards the garden
Figure 5. Top: Dominus Winery as seen from the street
Centre: Approaching the main entrance
Bottom: View from inside out
23
Figure 6. 1. The Goetz Gallery in Munich during daytime
3. The Goetz Gallery at dusk
5. The Goetz Gallery – clerestories
7. The Goetz Gallery – ground floor, the glass
as mirror; reflections of passers-by
2. The Tate Modern in London during daytime
4. The Tate Modern at dusk
6. The Tate Modern – clerestories
8. The Tate Modern – ground floor café; same mirror24
game as in the precedent study of the Goetz Gallery
Chapter Three
Collaboration with and influences by artists

“My attention has always been caught more by the world of certain
contemporary artists than by the world of contemporary architects. Artists have a
blank wall when they get up in the morning. They have no programme of
requirements from a client. They have to fill this void somehow. They need more of
their own imagination to fill this void, to develop their language. They are freer but
most architects could not live with that freedom. This is the scariest thing but also
the most liberating. And that is what I like about artists.”32
Jacques Herzog

“Especially in conceptual and installation art, it seems that it is rather the artists
who tend to employ working methods and particularly working processes – such as
the sequence of inception, working through drawings and then commissioning a
third party to execute a project – derived from architectural practice.”33
Torsten Schmiedeknecht

There has always been and indissoluble bond between Art and Architecture. Since
the former stands as a medium of free expression, the latter frequently tends to find
inspiration within this vast world of ideas. No matter how tied the architect‟s hands
are, in terms of financial and pragmatic conditions, he usually manages to
translate this abstract declarations into something tactile. It is different, however,
when this interpretation takes the form of imitation, instead of specification.

32 Curtis J.R. Williams, ‘A conversation with Jacques Herzog: THE NATURE OF ARTIFICE’, ‘Special Issue: H & de M 1998-
2002’, EL CROQUIS 109/110, p.28
33 Schmiedeknecht Torsten, ‘Art and Architecture: A Reciprocal Relationship?’, in ‘Art+Architecture’, ed. by Ivan

Margolius, Architectural Design, Vol.73, No 3 (May/June 2003), p.91

25
3.1 Donald Judd

Being an explorer by nature, Donald Judd brought a revolution to what Modernism

represented. He started using industrial materials, such as Plexiglass, aluminium, red
and regular brass, Formica, sheet steel and plywood, etc, as a reaction to the
traditional methods. His aim was to render autonomous pieces of art, focusing on
purity of form, colour, materials and spaces they created around them (fig.1). His
work widely characterised as minimal, was conceived by him as „the simple
expression of complex thought‟34. To explain this further, his essay Specific Objects
(1965) refers to the „physio-mental procedure of perception. (His work) does
everything to avoid associations that have nothing to do with themselves‟35. All
about his boxes then, is their actual condition as industrially fabricated objects and
not as sculptural pieces with references to their context. H & de M were
introduced to Judd‟s ideas through an exhibition of his work in the Basel Art
Museum, and an essay of another artist, friend and collaborator, Rémy Zaugg in
the 1970‟s. Nevertheless, it was not until their collaboration with Joseph Beuys and
that this influence materialised.

3.2 Joseph Beuys

“...people can only express themselves in ways that have material forms.”36

The unconventionality of Joseph Beuys as an artist becomes apparent once

considered that his career began through the field of medicine. His interests,
including the natural environment, defined the way in which he would develop his
work. In that appreciation, the direct way to communicate and to perceive
something is through our senses. This is why he chooses recognisable materials,
such as copper, plywood, felt and fat, to create a language to work with. In
contrast to Donald Judd, he loads them with meaning, other than what they

34 th
http://www.tate.org.uk/modern/exhibitions/judd/ [accessed 20 December 2010]
35 Mack Gerhard, Herzog & de Meuron: The Complete Works, vol.3: 1992-1996 (Basel, Birkhäuser,2005), p.8
36 Beuys Joseph, Was ist Kunst?: Werkstattgespräch mit Beuys, Translation: What is Art?: Conversation with Joseph

Beuys, ed. by Volker Harlan, trans. by Matthew Barton and Shelley Sacks (Forest Row, Clairview Books, 2004), p.21
26
originally betray; and this occurs through a method of perception following a
semantic change. H & de M were greatly influenced by it, something that
becomes obvious in the way they treat their surfaces and use simple materials
diversely – see the Plywood House, Studio Frei (fig.2), and Signal Box Auf dem Wolf
(fig.1). Beyond that, they also adapted from Beuys the idea of continuous evolve,
or incompleteness. In regard to that, Beuys explains:
“The nature of my sculpture is not fixed and finished. Processes
continue in most of them: chemical reactions, fermentations,
colour changes, decay, drying up. Everything is in a state of
change.”37

3.3 Rémy Zaugg

What seems to validate the words of Torsten Schmiedeknecht (see beginning of

this chapter, second quote) is the collaboration of Rémy Zaugg and H & de M for
the design of the master plan of Bourgogne‟s University in Dijon (1989-90). The
project was assigned to the artist, but in order to complete it, he introduced the
architects into it. A number of other collaborations followed; the exhibition of H &
de Meuron‟s work in the Pompidou Centre in Paris (1995), the Fünf Höfe (Five
Courts) in Munich (1994-2003), where they also worked with photographer Thomas
Ruff, and the Aargauer Museum Extension (2003), to name a few. As both parts
claim, this professional relationship is based on mutual contribution. It is rather a
simultaneous exploration of conditions, the Beuys would do; they insist on
redefining everything that appears as fixed. The result of this continuous dialogue
between them was Rémy Zaugg‟s atelier (1996) at Mulhouse-Pfastatt, France.
Retaining the rectangular box form, learnt from Judd and previously applied on
the Goetz Gallery, the rough concrete structure serves work and exhibition needs.
Being built concurrently with the Tate Modern, it was as prototype for the latter‟s
exhibition spaces (fig.3). Since the artist had long been interested and studying

37 Ibid, p.9
27
„what an ideal exhibition space will be like‟, this project incorporates all these
conclusions:

„The planes of the spaces... should be rectangular in outline... The

walls and ceilings should be of an identical material and painted
white, with a slightly textured finish, whereas the floor should be
constructed of “a natural material of a medium tonal value with
broken colouring... If it is necessary to have installations for
delivering heat, ventilation, natural or artificial light, then... (it)
should be masked by some kind of glass enclosure”... Within each
group of gallery spaces, there should be no hierarchy and the
external views establish a sense of personal location when passing
from one site to the next.‟38

Another interesting element of project is one of its exterior walls. The architects
deliberately, in the course of experimenting with textures, omitted putting gutters
onto the roof. So, when it rains and the water floods the roof, it starts running onto
the concrete wall. Pollution and water, then, leave their marks, contributing to the
„incomplete‟ and ever-changing character of the built object, in the sense of
Beuys (fig.4).

3.4 Dan Graham

Another theme that has always held the interest of H & de M was the public
space. Apart from Beuys, Dan Graham extensively experimented on this field. After
a series of photographs depicting row houses of the suburbs in a sculptural way, he
moved on to examine the corporate architecture of North American cities. By the
mid-1970, he came up with the remark that the public space was largely being
privatised by the corporate towers. What was also happening, though, was that,
through this privatisation, the courtyards of these buildings were used by the public

38Allison Peter, ‘Collaboration in the Turbine Hall: The Tate Gallery of Modern Art by Herzog and de Meuron’, in
‘Herzog & de Meuron: Tate Gallery of Modern Art, London, UK 1994-1999’ A+U, No 8 (347) (1999 AUG.), p.88
28
again as gardens and plazas. In this it becomes difficult to distinct the inside from
the outside, with the glass façades of the buildings to range between
translucency, transparency and mirroring39. This idea was later adapted by H & de
M in the form of, e.g. the Turbine Hall in Tate Modern and the Fünf Höfe (Five
Courts) in Munich. These different uses of glass also meant for Graham the
transition between urban and suburban environments. Studying that, he made a
model „Alteration to a Suburban House‟ (image on the cover), where he switched
the exterior solid wall of the house with a transparent glass façade, and the
parallel interior wall with a mirror glass. Thus, the boundaries between the two
worlds were confused, creating a new zone40, as the privacy was lost, and, in
addition, both people from inside and outside could awkwardly see themselves on
the mirror. Inspired by this experiment, H & de M began to use glass in a wide
range of manners, even achieving to give it a „three-dimensional‟ appearance, as
in the Institute for Hospital Pharmaceuticals in Basel.

39 Mack Gerhard, Herzog & de Meuron: The Complete Works, vol.3: 1992-1996 (Basel, Birkhäuser,2005), p.16
40 Ibid, p.17
29
Figure 1. Top: Donald Judd’s 100 mill Aluminum Boxes in Marfa Texas (1982-86)
Bottom: H & de M’s Signal Box Auf dem Wolf in Basel (1994)

30
Figure 2. Top: Feuerstätte II, by Joseph Beuys in
Collaboration with H&deM (1978)
Felt suits, copper and iron elements
Centre: Plywood House, Bottmingen, by H&deM
(1984-85)
Bottom: Façade of the Photographic Studio Frei,
Weil am Rhein, by H&deM (1892)
31
Roofing felt as a wall-constructing material
In response to its informal context
Figure 3. Top left: Atelier Rémy Zaugg, exhibition space
Top right: Tate Modern, exhibition space; artificial lighting flushed into the ceiling
Centre: Tate Modern, untreated oak floor
Bottom left: Tate Modern, cavities within the walls hide the services
Bottom right: Tate Modern, exiting some galleries, the visitor views the Turbine Hall; to the
North galleries Giles Scott’s cathedral windows with views to the river help to orientate
32
Figure 4. Atelier Rémy Zaugg, the water marks on the concrete wall give it a richer texture, in perfect match with
its context, which will permanently be transforming

33
Chapter Four
Changing uses

“A really imaginative conversion can be more exciting than a new building” 41

Nicholas Serota

“Our approach is closer to Viollet-le-Duc, with a pinch of Asian martial arts. We

compare this procedure with the Aikido strategy of using the opponent’s energy to
gain the upper hand. These tactics lead to something new which is, ideally, twice
as effective.”42
Jacques Herzog

The old Power Station, when acquired from the Tate, was a redundant, vast
industrial space full of rusty machinery and mounds of dust. There was no obvious
element indicating that one of the world‟s leading art gallery‟s would occur within
these walls. On the contrary, what people saw in Bankside was, of course, Sir Giles
Gilbert Scott‟s brick masterpiece, but also a monolithic, gloomy, once productive
and always private building that had nothing to do with arts, culture,
entertainment or exaltation, which some would later experience in the oncoming
Tate Gallery‟s of Modern Art exhibition rooms. It was the experienced eye of
Jacques Herzog and Harry Gugger of the Herzog and de Meuron architectural firm
that succeeded in visualising the transformation of this forgotten realm into a fully
working, conducive organism. However, this rebirth meant hard work to the
extremes for all involved parts. In this course, what needs to be addressed first is
the historical background of the former station.

41
Spalding Frances, The Tate: A History (London, Tate Galley Publishing Limited, 1998), p. 279
42
Herzog, Jacques, and Pierre de Meuron, NATURAL HISTORY, ed. by Philip Ursprung (Baden, Müller Publishers, 2005),
p.149
34
4.1 The Pre-existing Building’s Background

The station was built in two phases, between 1947 and 1963. Much as it was
accredited, it had to close down by 1981 due to an increase in fuel prices. Except
for the south part, operating property of London Electricity until recently, the rest of
the building remained unoccupied up to the time that the Tate became
interested in buying it in 1994. Its architect, Sir Giles Gilbert Scott, well known in his
time, owed his fame partly to his grandfather, Sir George Gilbert Scott, the
architect behind the Foreign Office and various churches, and partly to a series of
works characterised by versatility, attention to detail, and an ability to marry
tradition to modernity43. Having in his curriculum vitae a respectable number of
Roman Catholic churches44 among other memorable works, such as the Battersea
Power Station and K6 telephone box, it was no surprise he employed vertical,
ribbon-windows sets to run the full height and length of the northern elevation as
well as another set of such windows to the east and west façades. What he had in
mind was the creation of a building that „would be a satisfactory neighbour to St.
Paul‟s‟45 and this becomes quite obvious in his preliminary sketches, as well as his
first design for Bankside Power Station, where the two 99m-high chimneys (later
reduced into one) look as reminiscent of churches‟ bell towers46.

4.2 Description of the Pre-existing building

The reddish brick envelope, covering the steel structure below it, consisted of more
than 4.2 million bricks47, breathing a sense of solidity, heaviness, power. In plan, the
rectangular building had been divided into three zones (viewed in cross section),
each entertaining different services. The northern one, along the river façade, kept
the Boiler House, while the colossal middle zone, called Turbine Hall
accommodated four turbines, which used steam from the boilers48. The third,

43
Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott
(London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited, 2000), pp.178-179
44
Ibid, p.178
45
Ibid, p.182
46
Ibid
47
Tate Gallery of Modern Art (London, Tate Gallery, c.1996) p.2
48
Sabbagh Karl, Power into Art (London, Penguin Books Ltd, 2000), p.10
35
facing south, was the Switch House, where the conversion from high voltage to low
voltage electricity was taking place49. Except for the above ground spaces, the
station had a significant below ground part, where more machinery and pipes
were found. The southern part of the basement was dedicated to three grandiose
oil tanks. An overall impression of the building‟s size is given briskly by Viscount
Samuel during the debate of the 19th May 1947 about the „Proposed Bankside
Power Station‟:

I do not know whether your Lordships have all fully realized the immense size
of the structure which is to be erected on the south bank of the river
opposite St. Paul's. Its length is to be 450 feet. St. Paul's is 515 feet, so it is nine-
tenths the length of the Cathedral; or, if we consider this building in which we
are now meeting and have in our minds the long river front of the Houses of
Parliament from the Clock Tower to the Victoria Tower, this building will be
just about half as long as the Houses of Parliament. The height of it is to be 87
feet. The average height of this building is about 80 feet.50

4.3 Dealing with the existing

Herzog and de Meuron‟s entry to competition had something unique. It was

suggesting for the first time internationally the full adaption of a gigantic-scale
existing industrial building51. And that was very much in line with the oncoming
needs of the densely built and inhabited urban centres of the world; or in other
words, in harmony with tradition, not as a typology indicator, but as conventional
wisdom that pleads for preservation and conservation as means of economy.
What‟s ironic, the then unknown Swiss architectural firm had unintentionally
respected British‟s particular affection towards Tradition.

49
Ibid
50
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1947/may/19/proposed-bankside-power-station [accessed 25th
September 2010]
51
Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott
(London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited, 2000), p. 15
36
Having survived its polemicists and the high possibility of its demolishment, either
due to its desolation or a winning competition entry proposing a new building, the
station needed to be surveyed. The results would provide useful guidelines in the
framework of changing use. And since the Herzog & de Meuron proposal wanted
the brick skin to remain, this would be the starting point in terms of testing its
endurance. The engineering consultants adjudged the structure and bricks to be
in good condition52. The architects‟ view of the skin was that of being very fragile
and difficult to handle, in terms of its almost uninterrupted solidity and symmetry,
and intervening to it would cause the change of the building‟s expression 53. Thus,
they only abstracted elements that had been added to the structure through
time, among which a wrapped-around-the-chimney element on the ground
level54, exposing once again the clear form of the tower. Consequently, their major
proposal regarding the north elevation, the Light Beam, as they called it, could
initiate a dialogue with the existing vertical component.

The controversy between the dark and heavy member on one hand, and the airy
member on the other hand would create a much-needed balance55.
Furthermore, the Light Beam would be the signal of the Bankside Power Station‟s
alteration of course56, a fact that, unless this unit, could pass unnoticed at the
beginnings. However, the Light Beam had another three practical uses, one of
them being the accommodation of two extra floors, where the café-restaurant
and members room were placed57. The second deals with the illumination of both
the top-floor galleries, and the Turbine Hall beneath, while the last provides
protection from weather. Of course, there would have to be further illumination
sources, artificial lighting, to secure that spaces are always lit sufficiently. The
galleries of the 3rd and 4th floors would benefit from the „cathedral‟ floor-to-ceiling
windows, but also have flush lights on their ceilings. The Turbine Hall, nevertheless,
needed artificial lighting, a problem solved by the Bay Windows.

52
Spalding Frances, The Tate: A History (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited, 1998), p.280
53
Sabbagh, p.67
54
Moore, p.127
55 nd
Morris Francis ed., Tate Modern: The Handbook, 2 rev. ed. (London, Tate Publishing, 2010), p.47
56
Ibid
57
When the sun sets and the lights to the interior of the glass structure are turned on, pedestrians onto Millennium
Bridge or just across the river can see the shadows of people moving in that spaces. Hence, this stands as a proof that
the vast, dark building, despite its gloominess, is actually alive.
37
Between the Boiler House and the Turbine Hall there was a row of steel columns
running the full height of the building and notionally separating the two spaces.
The architects retained them, but subtly managed to interrupt their verticality by
introducing the idea of some kind of „internal balconies‟, within artificial light boxes
covered with translucent glass. These prominent objects would give a floating
impression, while carrying the people onto them58. Except for the above, the Bay
Windows were very important components of the design in terms of human
experience and social interaction (fig.1). They would provide a space for people
to rest, when moving from one gallery to another, and meet59. Moreover, they
would enhance the connection between the Galleries accommodated into the
Boiler House, and the Turbine Hall, integrating the experience of the visitors60.

Another key feature of H & de M‟s proposal was the idea of introducing the
Turbine Hall as a plaza or galleria accessible to everyone 61. By removing the
existing ground floor of this room, the architects created a 152m long and 35m
high space62 that, besides from providing exhibition space for oversized art works,
was meant to welcome the visitors in a very celebrating way. For the ones who
came from the west side of the building there was another surprise waiting.

The west entrance was denoted by a wide ramp, which was ingeniously starting to
slope quite a few meters outside the building, blending naturally with landscape.
People coming from Southwark would be hard not to feel inclined to slide towards
the entrance. Even if they didn‟t intend to visit the Gallery, the Ramp would still act
as a reference point, another meeting spot63. But once they got past the entrance
and within the Turbine Hall, they would find themselves overwhelmed by the
theatricality of the space, having to confront both the vastness above their heads
and probably an imposing, abstract and usually provoking piece of art. This would
be their first contact with the venue, a prologue to what they were about to see.

58
Sabbagh Karl, Power into Art (London, Penguin Books Ltd, 2000), p.278
59
Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott
(London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited, 2000), p.156
60
This idea can also be found in the nearby area of Borough, also in Southwark, where the great majority of its old
Inns used to have bay windows overlooking the closed courtyards below.
61
Moore, p.146
62 st
http://www.tate.org.uk/modern/building/, [accessed 1 October 2010]
63
Moore, p.138
38
Moreover, that would be amplified by the fact that, from the outside, the building
does not match the average idea of a contemporary art gallery that is usually
flashy, striking and self-centred. For its decriers this was all wrong from the
beginning, but the case proved it right, since every hint of surprise – often born out
of contradictions – intensifies the experience.

The northern entrance, located to either sides of the chimney, would move
towards the same direction. This entrance would be accessible from the river walk.
Just to the front of it, the visitors would find a plaza, and, if kept moving inwards,
past the doors, they would find themselves on a big platform, cross cutting the
Turbine Hall and hanging above it. What would be more exciting is that they
should feel as if they had not abandoned their route, since the river walk and
plaza outside lead to and were conceived as a continuation of the platform 64. In
addition, this component would serve as a bridge in the future, when, during the
second phase of development, it would link the Boiler House and Galleries to the
Switch House, but also the river promenade of the north to the south gardens and
other areas of Southwark65. But that wouldn‟t be all.

There would be other rigorous moments throughout the building, which, although
minor, would play their role in convincing the visitors that the TGMA is about a
complete experience and self-discovery. Everything that was designed to be
unobtrusive, such as the rough, industrial ventilation grilles on the gallery floors or
the untreated oak floor in the exhibition spaces, contributed to a finely tuned
outcome, so well thought out that almost demands attention and compliment.
Such an example is the main staircase, fitted to the west side of the Boiler House.
The diversity between flights managed to create a unique experience of the
space it runs through. Descending its steps gives the opportunity to check what
happens on each level‟s concourse or „disengage from the stream of visitors‟66 or
even give one‟s body a different pace before moving to the next gallery. A similar
thing applies also to the gallery spaces. These rooms, as simple as possible, display
a variety of attributes, so that each is special in its own rights. Some have very thick

64
Ibid, p.142
65
Ibid
66
Ibid, p. 154
39
walls, others have walls added or removed, and others get different types of light,
while one is double-height, all, nevertheless, securing an uninterrupted experience
of art.

40
Figure 1. Top: View from a Bay Window downwards to the Platform and Turbine Hall
Bottom: View from the Platform upwards towards a Bay Window
A ‘see and be seen’ game
41
Figure 2. Top: Level 1
Centre: Level 2 (ground)
Bottom: Level 3

42
Figure 3. 1. Level 4
2. Level 5
3. Level 6 (Light Beam, bottom level)
4. Level 7 (Light Beam, upper level – bar/restaurant)
43
Figure 4. Top: Cross-section, looking east
Bottom: Long section through the turbine hall, with boiler house
elevation

44
Figure 5. Competition entry: cross section showing different gallery types

45
Conclusion
Beyond the art gallery

According to the Tate Modern‟s competition brief, one of the main termini would
be the connection of two opposing parts of London; the City and Southwark. Due
to Southwark‟s low background, its regeneration would be another requirement.
Such was the importance of the latter, that the London Borough of Southwark
opted to be among the investors. Under this scope, the scheme was conceived as
a public network (fig.1), comprised by cross routes leading to a central plaza,
various shops and gardens, with great sensitivity towards the topography and the
access to it. The pedestrian Millennium Bridge was also part of this extensive plan. It
was the first bridge to be built after at least 100 years.

The north side of the site - where the bridge lands - is the new face of Southwark
towards the riverfront and the capital. The Tate Modern with its Light Beam as a
beacon at the top is the materialisation of this swift. People approaching from the
Millennium Bridge have the chance to be smoothly introduced to this event, since
– after the removal of some of the pre-existing buildings of the area – they have
clear views of the Tate. The landing of the Bridge was the work of the sculptor
Anthony Caro, who managed to blend it harmoniously with the ground and
surroundings by splitting it in two, towards East and West, and then using ramps
and gentle steps to reach the ground. Once on the river promenade, the visitor
takes an almost voluntary turn to face the central plaza of the Bankside Gardens.
To the West there is a complex of birch trees with grass, which functions as a resting
place for the sunny days (fig.2.1). To the East, another group of smaller birches
denotes the transitions to the domestic scale of the adjacent 17 th century houses.
Following the course of the plaza, the visitor meets the north entrance, just to the
right and left of the chimney. Through the chimney, the plaza evolves into the
platform, inside the building – on level two – and above the Turbine Hall. After the
completion of the second phase of the Tate‟s transformation, this platform will
become a bridge, directly linking the hinterland of Southwark to the riverfront.

The West Court is a key element to the design. It is a transitional space at the
moment between the open spaces of the north side and the more constrained of
the South Terraces. Thus it also serves as a meeting point (fig.2.2), providing
outdoor seating steps under the birches. The main entrance to this side, quite low,
in relation to what follows, is the reaction to a wide, descending into the ground,
ramp, which concludes smoothly into the Turbine Hall (fig.3). The architects
invented this mechanism to serve two ideas; first, to take advantage of the full
height of the Turbine Hall, in order to load the entering experience with more
tension; and second, to avoid hierarchy in terms of spatial order, a lesson well-
taught by Judd, Beuys and Zaugg. The end of this journey – and the beginning of
another – is the Turbine Hall, a covered arcade and focal point, not of the building
only, but of the whole surrounding community.

After ten years of function, Tate Modern proves to have embodied every ambition
from all parts. It has turned into a cultural hub, changing the introverted stance of
46
Londoners towards Modern Art since the mid-1990. Moreover, it has offered the
architectural community a moment to remember, to monumentalise. H & de M
used many of the Tate‟s solutions to other schemes later on, such as the Ricola
Factory in Laufen, the Cottbus University Library and the de Young Museum. With
the completion of the second phase of the transformation in 2012, the Tate
Modern is going to divulge its full potential as „an urban machine that generates
urban-associated behaviors‟67.

67Mack Gerhard, Herzog & de Meuron: The Complete Works, vol. 4: 1997-2001 (Basel, Birkhäuser Verlag AG, 2009),
p.13
47
Figure 1. Competition entry, site plan

48
Figure 2. 1 (top): Bankside Gardens west side, people relaxing and enjoying the view across the river
2 (bottom): West Courts, stepping slope with benches just outside the café

49
Figure 3. Top: Entering the Turbine Hall through the west entrance
Bottom: Leaving from the west side resembles what could be leaving the mouth of a
whale

50
(Word Count: 7785)
51
Bibliography

 Beuys Joseph, Was ist Kunst?: Werkstattgespräch mit Beuys, Translation: What is Art?:
Conversation with Joseph Beuys, ed. by Volker Harlan, trans. by Matthew Barton
and Shelley Sacks (Forest Row, Clairview Books, 2004)
 Burdett Richard ed., City Changes: Architecture in the City of London 1985-1995
(Wisbech, Balding & Mansell plc, 1994)
 Herzog Jacques, ‘Thinking of Gadamer‟s Floor‟, in Anything, ed. by Cynthia
Davidson (London, MIT Press, 2001), pp.115-119
 Herzog, Jacques, and Pierre de Meuron, Natural History, ed. by Philip Ursprung
(Baden, Lars Müller Publishers, 2005)
 Jodidio Philip, New Forms: Architecture in the 1990’s (Köln & New York, Taschen,
1997)
 Mack Gerhard, Herzog & de Meuron: The Complete Works, vol. 2: 1989-1991 (Basel,
Birkhäuser, 1996)
 Mack Gerhard, Herzog & de Meuron: The Complete Works, vol. 3: 1992-1996 (Basel,
Birkhäuser, 2005)
 Mack Gerhard, Herzog & de Meuron: The Complete Works, vol. 4: 1997-2001 (Basel,
Birkhäuser Verlag AG, 2009)
 Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron
transforming Giles Gilbert Scott (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited, 2000)
 Morris Francis ed., Tate Modern: The Handbook, 2nd rev. ed. (London, Tate
Publishing, 2010)
 Sabbagh Karl, Power into Art (London, Penguin Books Ltd, 2000)
 Spalding Frances, The Tate: A History (London, Tate Galley Publishing Limited, 1998)
 Tate Gallery of Modern Art (London, Tate Gallery, c.1996)
 Wang Wilfred, “Herzog & de Meuron” (Basel, Birkhäuser, 1998)

Internet resources

 Brown Alexandra, “Complexities, Discrepancies and Ambiguities: assessing the

disciplinarity of Herzog & de Meuron‟s architecture through Judd‟s generic art”,
www.melbourneartjournal.unimelb.edu.au/E-MAJ, emaj issue 4, accessed 17th May
2010
52
  De Botton Alain, “Tate Modern: a symbol of Britain as it would like to be”,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-features/7623851/Tate-Modern-a-
symbol-of-Britain-as-it-would-like-to-be.html accessed 17th May 2010
 http://www.dominusestate.com/architecture.html accessed 5th December 2010
 http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1947/may/19/proposed-bankside-
power-station, accessed 25/09/2010
 http://www.ricola.com/index.cfm?uuid=980EB29A2B351571E89BB33A63B4A4B3
 Schoenberg Lisa P., “The Tate Modern and the Future of the Art Museum”,
http://www.uqtr.ca/AE/Vol_9/nihil/shoen.htm accessed 17th May 2010
 http://www.tate.org.uk/modern/building/ accessed 1st October 2010
 http://www.tate.org.uk/modern/exhibitions/judd/ accessed 20th December 2010
 http://www.walkerart.org/archive/4/9C43FDAD069C47F36167.htm accessed 21st
December 2010

Journals

 Allison Peter, „Collaboration in the Turbine Hall: The Tate Gallery of Modern Art by
Herzog and de Meuron‟, in „Herzog & de Meuron: Tate Gallery of Modern Art,
London, UK 1994-1999‟ A+U, No 8 (347) (1999 AUG.), pp.87-90

 ANY: Architecture New York, No 13 (1996), pp.48-62

 Architectural Review, Vol 189, No 1127 (1991 Jan.), pp.50-54

 Blueprint, No 115 supplement (1995 Mar.), pp.1-30

 “City Focus: London”, World Architecture, no. 87 (2000 June), pp.42-55

 Curtis, J.R. William, „Herzog & de Meuron‟s architecture of luminosity and

transparency transforms an old power station on the Thames into the new TATE
GALLERY OF MODERN ART‟, in Architectural Record, Vol 188, No 6 (2000 June),
pp.103-115, 242, 244

 Davidts, Wouter, „The Illusion of re-conversion: Tate Modern in London‟, in Archis, No

8 (2000 Aug.), pp.40-49

 „Gallery for a private collection of modern art, Goetz Collection, Munich, Germany,
1989-1992‟, in „Special Issue: Herzog & de Meuron: 1978-2002‟ A+U (2002 Feb.),
pp.168-175

 „H&deM: Studio Rémy Zaugg, Basel, Switzerland 1995-1996‟, in A+U, No 325 (1997
Oct.), p.80

53
 „HERZOG & DE MEURON: TATE GALLERY OF MODERN ART, Bankside, London‟, in
Architectural Design, Vol 69 (1999), p.57

 Herzog, Jacques and Pierre de Meuron, „Two Fields of Operation: Surfaces and
Structures‟, in LOTUS, No 76 (1993), pp.121-123

 Huber, Dorothy, „The Hidden and the Apparent: Comments on the Work of Jacques
Herzog and Pierre de Meuron‟, in Assemblage, No 9, (1989 June), pp.114-117

 Iain Borden, „Timed-out Architecture: Twenty-One Time-Spaces for the Twenty-First

Century‟, in „Special Issue: UK2K: British Architecture into the Millennium‟ New
Architecture 4, No 4, (2000 Jan.), pp.9-119

 „Into the void: Herzog & de Meuron‟s Tate Modern‟, in Architecture Today, Vol 104-
113 (2000), pp.34-57

 Modern Painters, Vol 13, No 2 (2000 summer), pp.59-63

 „Rémy Zaugg: l‟atelier‟, in Architecture d’ aujourd’ hui, No 315 (1998 Feb.), pp.39-55

 “Special Issue: Herzog & de Meuron” Architecture d’ aujourd’ hui, No 300 (1995
Sept.) pp.39-75

 “Special Issue: Herzog & de Meuron: 1983-1993”, EL CROQUIS, 60, (1993), pp.6-36,
94-95

 “Special Issue: Herzog & de Meuron: 1993-1997”, EL CROQUIS, 84 (1997), pp.7-28

 “Special Issue: Herzog & de Meuron: 1998-2002”, EL CROQUIS, 109/110 (2004),

pp.16-49

 “Special Issue: Herzog & de Meuron: 2002-2006”, EL CROQUIS, 129/130 (2006), pp.9-
39, 56-67

 Steiner, Dietmar, „Studio for an artist, Mulhouse-Pfastatt‟ in DOMUS, No 794 (1997

June), pp.10-17

 “New Thames Survey”, AA Files, no. 40 (1999 winter), pp.17-32

 Schmiedeknecht, Torsten, „Art and Architecture: A Reciprocal Relationship?‟, in

„Art+Architecture‟, ed. by Ivan Margolius, Architectural Design, Vol.73, No 3
(May/June 2003), pp.87-96

 Templin, Karin, „CREATIVE’, glass magazine, issue 1: grace, spring 2010, p.223-227

 Wang, Wilfred, „Herzog & De Meuron: Interpreting the place‟, in Architecture Today,
No 2 (1989 Oct.), pp.44-47

54
Audiovisual
Architects Herzog And De Meuron - Alchemy Of Building Tate Modern, DVD
(Microcinema, MC-792, 2001)

Illustrations

Cover

Found in
http://s242.photobucket.com/albums/ff296/grahammcnally/?action=view&curr
ent=dangraham-suburbanhouse.jpg
Retrieved 7th December 2010

Introduction

Figure 1. Found in
http://www.andrewgrahamdixon.com/article_images/nicholas_serota.jpg
Retrieved 15th November 2010

Chapter 1

Figure 1. Found in
Top: Bing Maps 2010 edited by the author,
Bottom: http://www.smff.org/uk/images/map.gif
Retrieved 15th November 2010

Figure 2. Found in
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brighton/5198463493
Retrieved 15th November 2010

55
Figure 3. Retrieved from
Jodidio Philip, New Forms: Architecture in the 1990’s, (Köln & New York, Taschen,
1997), p. 87

Figure 4. Found in
http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kxbbl29LiD1qaxdmfo1_500.jpg
Retrieved 15th November 2010

Figure 5. Found in
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Vitra_Design_Museum.JPG
Retrieved 15th November 2010

Figure 6. Found in
http://www.chicagoboyz.net/blogfiles/Getty3.jpg
Retrieved 15th November 2010

Figure 7. Retrieved from

Jodidio Philip, New Forms: Architecture in the 1990’s, (Köln & New York, Taschen,
1997), p. 94

Chapter Two

Figure 1. Found in
http://www.vitra.com/_assets/published/6/f01454ec7e8b70d.jpg
Retrieved 15th November 2010

Figure 2. Found in
http://mediatheque.epfl.ch/albums-actualites2/albun50/Gugger_1.jpg
Retrieved 15th November 2010

Figure 3. Found in
http://www.archiweb.cz/images/subjects/logo_portrait_223.jpg
Retrieved 15th November 2010

56
Figure 4. Found in
Top: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2637/4124414857_23e9c59105.jpg
Centre: http://postalesinventadas.blogspot.com/2008_10_01_archive.html
Bottom: http://architettura.it/allestimenti/20040108/13_c.jpg
Retrieved 15th November 2010

Figure 5. Found in
Top: http://www.drvino.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/dominus005.jpg
Centre: http://speakyourdesign.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/dominus2.jpg
Bottom: http://www.buzz-beast.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Dominus-
Estate-Winery-3.jpg
Retrieved 5th December 2010

Figure 6. Found in
6.1 http://therepublicofless.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/goertz-
munich.jpg?w=490&h=315
Retrieved 5th December 2010
6.2 Author‟s archive (May 2010)
6.3 http://www.sammlung-goetz.de/img.php?lang=en&url=/upload/
arch_museum/i_000006/1.jpg
Retrieved 5th December 2010
6.4 Author‟s archive (May 2010)
6.5 http://kubuildingtech.org/cooltour/gallery/goetz/source/26.html (ed. by the
author)
Retrieved 5th December 2010
6.6 Author‟s archive (May 2010)
6.7 http://www.mimoa.eu/images/5476_l.jpg (ed. by the author)
Retrieved 5th December 2010
6.8 http://budapestdailyreview.com/dailyphotos/wp-
content/uploads/2009/02/tate-modern-cafe.jpg
Retrieved 5th December 2010

57
Chapter Three

Figure 1. Found in
Top: http://mattmancini.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/71.jpg (ed. by the author)
Bottom:
http://www.toddeberle.com/Architecture%20Images/Architecture_02.jpg (ed.
by the author)
Retrieved 5th December 2010

Figure 2. Found in
Top: http://www.culture24.org.uk/asset_arena/9/92/15299/v0_master.jpg
Centre: Spiluttini, Margherita, Herzog & de Meuron: Plywood House, Bottmingen
(1989) in Herzog, Jacques, and Pierre de Meuron, Natural History, ed. by Philip
Ursprung (Baden, Lars Müller Publishers, 2005), p.283
Bottom: http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l81d7xf6u51qat99uo1_400.jpg (ed.
by the author)
Retrieved 7th December 2010

Figure 3. Found in
Top left: Spiluttini, Margherita, Herzog & de Meuron: Atelier Rémy Zaugg (1996)
(6440/B) in
http://www.spiluttini.com/image.php?media_id=48720
Retrieved 7th December 2010
Top right: Tate Photography, Leith, Marcus, and Andrew Dunkley Donald Judd,
Installation, View at Tate Modern, Level 4 East, in
http://www.artlies.org/article.php?id=135&issue=42&s=1 (ed. by the author)
Retrieved 7th December 2010
Centre: Author‟s archive (October 2010)
Bottom left: Author‟s archive (October 2010)
Bottom right: Author‟s archive (October 2010)

Figure 4. Found in
Spiluttini, Margherita, Herzog & de Meuron: Atelier Rémy Zaugg (1996) (6437/A) in
http://www.spiluttini.com/image.php?media_id=48723
Retrieved 7th December 2010

58
Chapter Four

Figure 1. Found in
Top: Author‟s archive (May 2010)
Bottom: Author‟s archive (May 2010)

Figure 2. Retrieved from

Top: Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de
Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited,
2000), p.167
Centre: Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de
Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited,
2000), p. 168
Bottom: Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de
Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited,
2000), p.169

Figure 3. Retrieved from

3.1 Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de
Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited,
2000), p.170
3.2 Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de
Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited,
2000), p.171
3.3 Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de
Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited,
2000), p.172
3.4 Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de
Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited,
2000), p.173

Figure 4. Retrieved from

Top: Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de
Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited,
2000), p.174

59
 Bottom: Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de
Meuron transforming Giles Gilbert Scott (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited,
2000), p.175

Figure 5. Retrieved from

Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron
transforming Giles Gilbert Scott (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited, 2000),
p.164

Conclusion

Figure 1. Retrieved from

Moore Rowan, and Raymund Ryan, Building Tate Modern: Herzog & de Meuron
transforming Giles Gilbert Scott (London, Tate Gallery Publishing Limited, 2000),
p.144

Figure 2. Found in
Top: Author‟s archive (May 2010)
Bottom: Author‟s archive (May 2010)

Figure 3. Found in
Top: Author‟s archive (May 2010)
Bottom: Author‟s archive (May 2010)

60