On Light and Dematerialization in Architecture

Final Report for the John K.

Branner Travelling Fellowship

For best image quality, view on-screen at 100% or smaller.

This report was meant to be viewed as facing pages.

© 2000 by John C. Klopf

On Light and Dematerialization in Architecture
John C. Klopf

“Light has no intellectual meaning even

though it touches the depths of our being in
every way.”

– Henry Plummer, Light in Japanese Archi-

tecture

Dematerialization in architecture is a perception, a belief. An

observer may believe that materials have lost their solidity, that
patterns of light are blending with and altering physical surfaces, or
that light has become more present than the physical construction it
has entered. Dematerialization convinces people they have entered
an alternate reality in which familiar rules such as the laws of gravity
can be bent. The apparently floating dome in a renaissance church is
a familiar and readily explicable example of dematerialization. Day-
light entering Alberti’s Sant’Andrea through windows below the dome
and through an oculus in its center make its underside brighter than
the surfaces around it and draw our eyes upward. Since we are
used to overhead surfaces appearing darker than their surroundings,
Sant’Andrea’s dome appears to defy gravity.

Christian worshippers may especially appreciate this metaphor for

divine light as part of their religion, but anyone can experience
dematerialization any time that light strikes a surface (or even when
light draws our attention away from surfaces). There are many more
possibilities than the typical example of a massive material that
appears to float. Effects vary depending on: material transparency,
color, texture, and orientation to the light; the quality and quantity of
light that hits a material; and the overall arrangement of the space 1. Pantheon, Rome - Roman: Light becomes
and the viewer’s position in it. By manipulating several of these a solid object, supporting the heavy concrete
dome.
variables, architects have designed spaces with quite a variety of
dematerializing effects. If one looks carefully, he/she will notice that
dematerialization happens frequently.

This study discusses four different ways in which light dematerializes

materials, fooling the eye and sparking the imagination. It is based
on observations and measurements the author made during ten
months of international travel in 1999. The author expresses grati-
tude to the family of John K. Branner, whose travelling fellowship
grant made this project possible.

Gothic Glimmerings
Imagine yourself living in the Middle Ages. People were generally
expected to live until their mid-thirties, but they probably looked like
they were in their fifties. And even if someone out-lived the odds,
chances are he/she would have lost all of his/her teeth anyway.
Mass entertainment was rare; life consisted of a daily routine of
back-breaking labor accompanied by a poor diet and uncomfort-
able housing. In northern Europe during the medieval period, cool
clammy weather, disease, human and animal wastes, and suffering
characterized villages and towns. Reality was harsh and the future
held no promise. The most visually exciting things people had ever
2. Sant’Andrea, Mantua - Alberti: Side light-
seen were the sun, the night sky, and fire. If you were living in those ing and an oculus brighten the underside of the
times, I imagine you would seek an escape from reality whenever dome, allowing it to float visually. Demateria-
possible. I also imagine you would be interested in associating lization draws the eye upward over the altar.

3. Notre Dame de Chartres - Gothic: With
all original stained glass in place, the interior
is anything but light and airy. Instead, backlit
stained glass steals presence from the stone.
4. Abbaye St-Ouen, Rouen - Gothic: Bright
light enters through clearer windows.
5. Notre Dame de Reims - Gothic: Clear
replacement glass next to dark stained glass
illustrates the difference glass makes.
with ideas that out-lasted your short, miserable life. Perhaps that’s
why pilgrims set out to visit the impressive and apparently timeless
gothic cathedrals.
The pointed stone arch and flying buttresses that characterize gothic
cathedrals make it possible to enclose larger, higher spaces with less
material than round arch construction does. Several cathedral build-
ers pushed arch heights to their limits, only giving up when ceilings
collapsed. Those that haven’t collapsed yet soar toward the sky, giv-
ing people a vantage point far higher than they had ever imagined.
From our standpoint today, the cathedrals are awe-inspiring in their
scale. Just imagine how impressive they would seem to the medieval
pilgrim.
Many people have assumed that gothic interiors were always bright-
er and more open than Romanesque interiors. If this were always
the case, pilgrims inside the arched side-aisles and nave would have
continued to appreciate the dominant scale of the church from the
inside, looking up to the soaring ceilings and imagining an all-power-
ful God. People today theorize that the soaring vaults and relatively
thin stone columns make stone appear to float, thereby dematerial-
izing it.
But what if the interiors were always dark, as they still are in
Notre Dame de Chartres? People would still appreciate the build-
ings’ dominant scale from the exterior. But once they entered, they
would discover a mystical world where sunlight behind stained glass
brought scenes from the Bible to life in front of their eyes. In a world
without film or television, a dark room full of brightly back-lit stained
glass windows would rival fire and the night sky as the most visu-
ally exciting things anyone in the middle ages had ever seen. There
would be no floating stone; in fact, it would be difficult to even
see the dark ceilings. They are visible today at Chartres because of
electric lighting.
How then, is the stone dematerialized at Chartres? It becomes an in-
visible backdrop pushed into the viewer’s subconscious. The glowing
pictures grab the visitor’s attention and spark the imagination. For
the dematerializing effect to work, the interior must be dark enough
that the stone is barely visible.
Where did people get the idea that gothic interiors are light and
airy, when in fact they were intended to be dark and mystical? The
last 800 or so years have claimed most of the original stained glass.
Instead of the deep blues, fiery reds and bright yellows that made
up the original panels, many replacement panels are clear. In short,
the replacement panels transmit more light into the interior allow-
ing visitors to see the stone as foreground instead of exclusively as
a background. Depending on the type of glass in place, different
gothic cathedrals range in interior illuminance from 0 to 5 f.c. on a
sunny day (Notre Dame de Chartres) to 26 to 272 f.c. when the sun
is behind a cloud (Abbaye St-Ouen in Rouen). (Exterior illuminance
levels at both sites was over 2000 f.c.) The abbey in Rouen is so
much brighter inside because it is fitted with almost clear replace-
ment stained glass panels; the cathedral in Chartres still has its
thick, dark original stained glass panels.
Finnish Fixture Fields
Think about tassels on the head of a martial arts spear. As one
martial artist moves the weapon through the air, his/her opponent
sees colorful strips of fabric instead of the dangerous steel blade.
The spearhead is not hidden or disguised; instead something else
draw’s the opponent’s attention away from it. By simply distracting
the opponent’s eye, the first martial artist has dematerialized the
spear, which puts him/her at an advantage. In Finland, Alvar Aalto
and Juha Leiviska have employed equally clever (but much more
peaceful) tactics to dematerialize architectural materials. Instead of 6. House of Culture, Helsinki - Aalto: Light
using tassels, they use electric light fixtures. fixtures become an array of stars in a firmament,
distracting us from the solid materials.

The human eye is capable of seeing in an extremely wide variety of

light levels. It cannot, however, see a very bright surface and a very
dark surface at the same time. The bright surface causes glare; if it
is bright enough, it can cause discomfort or injury to the eye. If it is
generally dim but still much brighter than surfaces around it, a light
fixture can dominate visual perception, upstaging darker surfaces
behind or above it. The effect only works well when other light
sources, such as daylight, are not present in the space. Task-ambient
lighting systems, when designed so the luminance levels of surfaces
are less varied, are the corollary to the fixture field.

In Aalto’s House of Culture in Helsinki, the auditorium is directly

over the lobby. Stairs leaving the lobby at various locations ascend
through the low ceiling into the auditorium. In the auditorium audi-
ences watch actors playing make-believe roles on stage sets intend-
ing to convince spectators they are actually somewhere else. Before
they even reach their seats, though, audience members transition
from the real world of outside to the make-believe world of the the-
ater by passing through a starry night sky in the lobby. One barely
perceives the lobby ceiling itself, as low as it is, because of the field
of glary, bright light fixtures hanging slightly below it. The ceiling
isn’t painted black, but it seems to be when the lights are on.

In Aalto’s Saynatsalo Town Hall, the effect isn’t as strong. The field
of electric lights there becomes dominant when turned on at night,
but during the day they compete with daylight entering through
louvers and gaps. The daylight, controlled as it is, lights up some
surfaces in the dim room just enough that they remain visible while
the glary lights are on.

To illustrate the difference between daylight dematerializing massive

construction and electric lights drawing attention away from it, look
at Juha Leiviska’s Mannisto Church. When the electric lights are off
and the sun is up, light enters the sanctuary through the “wings” of
the altar. From most of the pews, worshippers can only see the light-
washed plaster surfaces, not the windows perpendicular to them
that allow daylight in. The plaster surfaces seem to blend together
and glow ethereally when sunlight enters. To add to the effect,
Leiviska put color on the backs of certain wing panels; it is reflected
softly onto fronts of surrounding white plaster panels. Observers
may be so taken by the beauty of the ephemeral altar that they
never even notice the electric light fixtures hanging far down from 7. Mannisto Church, Kuopio - Leiviska:
Light fixtures advance and recede perceptually.
the ceiling at various heights. Dematerialization is caused by daylight and /
or electric light.
But if the electric lights are on, the altar becomes less important
visually. During the winter when Finland has only a little daylight,

8. The Philosopher in Meditation - Rem-
brandt: Light animates the philosopher and de-
materializes the heavy masonry construction.
9. Kunsthal, Rotterdam - OMA: Although it
allows a glimpse of the outside world, the frosted
glass wall redefines it. It also emphasizes the
objets d’art on display by contrast.
10. Megabioscoop, Rotterdam - van Nel-
son: Detail of connection between translucent
and transparent plastic panels. There is no clear
view out from the main lobby; the translucent
boundary creates a simpler, more ethereal
world inside.
church services occur during darker hours. At these services, the
lower levels of outside light entering fail to direct the gaze toward
the altar. Instead, worshippers become aware of electric lights hung
at various heights. These fixtures create a field of bright flying sau-
cer shapes with haloes, drawing attention away from the walls and
altar.
Dutch Diffusion
Look at “The Philosopher in Meditation” by Rembrandt. A large,
bright window just left of center on the panel stands out from the
otherwise dark interior. It allows light to flood in, washing the surfac-
es around it such as the philosopher’s desk, the wall that becomes
the spiral stairway, and the ceiling. The light not only animates
the thinking philosopher, but shows his importance (especially by
contrast with the servant tending the fire). Like in Sant’Andrea, the
brighter stone surfaces appear less massive than those around them
and draw our attention to the central focus.
Dutch architects have used large windows in their buildings for hun-
dreds of years. According to S.E. Rasmussen, the Dutch have been
proud of their possessions and have traditionally shown them off
to passers-by. This trend continues to this day throughout Amster-
dam, where shops display their goods and prostitutes advertise their
services behind large windows facing the street. The transparent
boundary between public street and private interior sometimes ap-
pears open and therefore dematerialized. This happens especially at
night, when interior lighting is much brighter that ambient city lights.
But during the day, when outside light is brighter, reflections can
make the clear glass appear solid, reversing the dematerialization.
Recently, Dutch architects have explored translucent boundaries. In-
stead of relying on transparency, pretending that the boundary is not
there, they are transforming Rembrandt’s moves into three-dimen-
sional space. In OMA’s Kusnthal and K. van Nelson’s Megabioscoop
(both in Rotterdam), we see translucent boundaries that break down
the materials beyond them, creating an ethereal atmosphere in
which the outside world itself dematerializes.
In the Kunsthal museum-goers encounter translucent walls from the
inside and outside. From the inside, the boundary acts like a news
anchor’s blue screen or a photographer’s scrim. It becomes a neutral
backdrop against which art really jumps out at the viewer. It dema-
terializes the entire outside world by removing importance from it.
From the outside, the wall seems like refracting shower glass. Items
inside are visible but broken down through refraction, so visitors
wonder what they really look like. The partial transparency builds up
a sense of mystery that draws passers-by into the museum.
In the Megabioscoop translucent plastic panels allow the building
itself to act like a film. During daylight hours, the back-lit translucent
panels glow ethereally, surrounding movie-goers with an escapist
atmosphere in which the specific time of day and actual conditions in
the city lose relevance. While inside, only the snack counter, tables,
plants, stairs, and theaters seem real. From the outside, the building
looks like many others. But at night, the effect reverses. The interior
lighting floods through the translucent skin; people outside see a
glowing, animated box. It the plastic were only one layer, perhaps
patron’s shadows would be cast onto the walls from the inside, fur-
ther animating the movie screen-like surface and further removing
solidity from the materials.

Filtering Frames
As the sun sets, and people look directly at it, they might notice it
becomes red as it sinks beyond the horizon. Just like the moon looks
much larger when it’s right over the ground, the sun also seems to
grow larger as it nears the horizon. Most people are surprised each
time at how fast the disc actually sinks. These observations make
the sun seem more material and real as it disappears than it seems
during the day.

If one turns around to look away from the sunset, though, one will
notice a variety of effects that the changing light has on our world.
Because the sun is lower in the sky, shadows become longer and
longer. We can watch our own shadows stretch out across meters
and kilometers of ground, until right at sunset our shadow heights
reach infinity. We can watch our shadow doubles move on nearby
walls as the red light casts our true shapes against them. We can 11. Sunset in Death Valley: Evening shadows
watch as light entering through a gap sweeps from one corner of stretch longer and longer while the ever-chang-
ing chiaroscuro dances over textured surfaces.
the room to another, lighting up parts of the floor and walls that
normally receive no direct light. And if a wall faces west, we can see
its surface colors change from gray to yellow to red. When looking
away from the sunset, we miss the actual orb dropping behind the
horizon, but we experience a whole new wonderful world that only
exists for the brief period we call dusk. The light and shadow we
witness then is so animated and powerful that the surfaces on which
they are cast become important more as backdrops than architec-
tural elements.

Some Japanese architects allow sunset phenomena to enter spaces

throughout more of the day than just dusk. They provide filters
through which controlled light enters interior spaces. The filters
themselves are permeable boundaries, most often partially trans-
parent; they seem less massive than solid walls. But they do have
a very real physical presence. The real dematerialization occurs
as daylight passes the filters and hits surfaces beyond. Whether it
comes through meshes, screens, or frames, the filtered light creates
changing surface patterns that overpower the surfaces themselves.
As the day passes, the shadow patterns move along, sliding slowly
around the corners and over the textures of the receiving surfaces.
The patterns are animated, like the results of the sunset; they steal
importance from the surfaces they touch. In addition to that, they
alter the surfaces so much that moving light and shadows make
solid walls appear fluid. Observers inside these filtered spaces feel
as though they are witnessing a new form of light, one perhaps in-
vented by a genius and sold in limited quantity to special customers
only.

Itsuko Hasegawa’s Sumida Cultural Center near Tokyo is a world
all to itself. As in her Shonondai Cultural Center, she uses punched
metal screens to filter sunlight into spaces and onto materials. A col-
umn disappears behind a spotted texture that moves over its surface
throughout the day. The floor and walls recede from perception as
the sun casts shadows of steel structure and infill screens all over
12. Sumida Cultural Center, Tokyo -
Hasegawa: Spots and stripes move over floor,
wall, and columns all day long. The texture
becomes more important than the physical
materials.
 it. Even people in the space take on a whole new look, becoming
something other than what they are on the street outside. Hasegawa
lets the natural directions and colors of daylight enter the spaces in
new ways to create a completely different perception. But she is only
limiting the quantity of light. Tadao Ando makes similar moves in his
Water Temple on Awaji Island, but also alters the quality of the light.

After descending through the Water Temple’s pool, one finds a very
dim, red underworld. The dark, quiet area is a modern rendition
of the ancient Chinese temple plan that found its way to Japan. It
contains what the Chinese call neitang and waitang, or the inner
and outer halls of the temple. As one proceeds from the outside to
the inside, daylight becomes less recognizable as light from the sun.
He enclosed a small courtyard with a concrete wall so that people
looking out from the halls will only see the sky. Additionally, light can
only enter the space from above. Although the building really isn’t
underground on this edge, the light well makes it feel that way. The
screen layer between the light well and the outer hall is a wooden
lattice painted red. As the sun moves overhead, it casts shadows of
the screen on the floor and walls; the shadows work their way over
the red ship-lapped walls and smooth varnished stairs, stealing their
solidity as in the Hasegawa buildings. As the sun moves through the
filter and reflects off the red interior walls, it also takes the material
color away and re-deposits it on other surfaces. The red glow draws
visitors around the otherwise dark circular outer hall and captures
the worshippers attention by animating the altar in the inner hall.
By manipulating the quantity, direction, and color of entering light,
Ando uses daylight to create a mystical, womb-like atmosphere.

13. Water Temple, Awaji Island - Ando:

Light passing through the wooden lattice mixes
its texture and color with the walls and floors,
bringing the changing surfaces alive while re-
moving their weight and substance.
Relevant Buildings Visited

This is a very select list of buildings visited during 1999. Buildings

that illustrate the material in this report especially well are marked
with an asterisk.

Gothic Glimmerings
(All in France)

Eglise Notre Dame, Romanesque, Pontorson

Abbaye St-Savin, Romanesque, St-Savin
*St-Michel d’Aguilhe, Romanesque, Le Puy en Velay
St-Astremoine, Romanesque, Issoire

Ste-Madeleine, Romanesque/Gothic, Vezelay 14. Eglise Notre Dame, Pontorson - Ro-

Mont St-Michel, Romanesque/Gothic, Pontorson
Eglise Notre Dame la Grande, Romanesque/Gothic, Poitiers
Basilique St-Julien, Romanesque/Gothic, Brioude
manesque: Although they have less surface
area of window than the gothic cathedrals, ro-
manesque churches can be quite bright inside.

St-Chapelle, Gothic, Paris

St-Marie, Gothic, Paris
St-Eglise, Gothic, Paris
Cathedral Notre Dame, Gothic, Paris
*Cathedral Notre Dame, Gothic, Chartres
Cathedral Notre Dame, Gothic, Reims
Cathedral Notre Dame, Gothic, Amiens
Cathedral Notre Dame, Gothic, Rouen
*Abbaye St-Ouen, Gothic, Rouen

Finnish Fixture Fields

(All in Finland)

Saynatsalo Civic Center, Alvar Aalto, Saynatsalo

*House of Culture, Alvar Aalto, Helsinki
National Pensions Institute, Alvar Aalto, Helsinki
Jyvasklya University Main Building, Alvar Aalto, Jyvaskyla

*Mannisto Church, Juha Leiviska, Kuopio

15. Saynatsalo Town Hall - Aalto: Light en-
Myyrmaki Church, Juha Leiviska, Helsinki
tering through various louvers provides enough
Vallila Library, Juha Leiviska, Helsinki ambient light that the fixture field fails.

Dutch Diffusion
(In The Netherlands unless noted otherwise)

*Megabioscoop, K. van Nelson, Rotterdam

*Kunsthal, Rem Koolhaas, Rotterdam
Natural History Museum, Eric van Egeraat, Rotterdam
*Old Rope Factory, Oha Laiho et. al., Turku Finland
Art Center Bregenz, Peter Zumthor, Bregenze Austria

16. Institut du Monde Arab, Paris - Nouvel:

An example of clear glass that can appear solid
because of reflection. Frosted class can demater-
ialize more effectively.

17. Sumida Cultural Center, Tokyo
- Hasegawa: Steel structure and partially
transparent screens.
18. Water Temple, Awaji Island - Ando:
Light enters through the red screen.
19. Hillside West, Tokyo - Maki: Reflection,
refraction, and shadow in a glass corner.
Filtering Frames
(All in Japan)
Toshogu, Shinto Shrine, Tokyo
Meiji Jingu, Shinto Shrine, Tokyo
*Fuhimi Inari Taisha, Shinto Shrine, Kyoto
Kasuga, Shinto Shrine, Nara
Tsobujinjijya, Shinto Shrine, Nara
*Itsukushima, Shinto Shrine, Miyajima
Todaiji, Buddhist Temple, Nara
*Zuiganji, Buddhist Temple, Matsushima
*Higashi Honganji, Buddhist Temple, Kyoto
Kinkakuji, Buddhist Temple, Kyoto
Chion-in, Buddhist Temple, Kyoto
Ninnaji, Buddhist Temple, Kyoto
Ginkakuji, Buddhist Temple, Kyoto
Manshi-in, Buddhist Temple, Kyoto
Nanzenji, Buddhist Temple, Kyoto
*Ryoanji, Buddhist Temple, Kyoto
*Shoren-in, Buddhist Temple, Kyoto
Shisendo, Buddhist Hermitage, Kyoto
Eikando, Buddhist Hermitage, Kyoto
*Open Air Farmhouse Museum, Traditional, Osaka
*Hida No Sato folk village, Traditional, Takayama
Yoshijima House, Traditional, Takayama
Kusakabe House, Traditional, Takayama
*Water Temple, Tadao Ando, Awaji
Church of the Light, Tadao Ando, Ibaraki
J-Gallery, Tadao Ando, Tokyo
Chapel on Mt. Rokko, Tadao Ando, Kobe
*Sumida Cultural Center, Itsuko Hasegawa, Tokyo
*Shonondai Cultural Center, Itsuko Hasegawa, Fujisawa
Keio University Campus, Fumihiko Maki, Fujisawa
*Hillside West, Fumihiko Maki, Tokyo
Tepia Science Building, Fumihiko Maki, Tokyo
*Tokyo Church of Christ, Fumihiko Maki, Tokyo
Olympic Gymnasia, Kenzo Tange, Tokyo
*Tokyo St. Mary’s, Kenzo Tange, Tokyo
Bibliography

Asian
Liu, Laurence G. Chinese Architecture. New York: Rizzoli. 1989.
Plummer, Henry. Light in Japanese Architecture. Tokyo: A + U. 1995.
Tanazaki, Jun’ichiro. In Praise of Shadows. New Haven: Leete’s
Island Books, Inc. 1977.
Wu, Nelson Ikon. Chinese and Indian Architecture: the City of Man,
the Mountain of God, and the Realm of the Immortals. New
York: G. Braziller. 1963.

Western
Harries, Karsten. The Bavarian Rococo Church: Between Faith and
Aestheticism. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1983.
Kahn, Louis Isadore. Light is the Theme. Fort Worth: Kimbell Art
Foundation. 1975.
Millet, Marietta. Light Revealing Architecture. New York: Van Nor-
strand Reinhold. 1996.
Plummer, Henry. The Poetics of Light. Tokyo: A + U. 1987.
Rasmussen, Steen Eiler. Experiencing Architecture. Cambridge, MA:
Technology Press; New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1959.

Experiential
Bachelard, Gaston. The Poetics of Space. Maria Jolas, trans. Boston:
Beacon Press. 1994.
Eliade, Mircea. The Sacred and the Profane: the Nature of Religion.
Willard R. Trask, trans. San Diego, New York, London: Harcourt,
Brace and World, Inc. 1959.
Harries, Karsten. The Ethical Function of Architecture. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press. 1997.
Holl, Steven. “Archetypal Experiences of Architecture.” in Questions
of Perception: Phenomenology of Architecture. Tokyo: A + U.
1994. pp 39-119.
Holl, Steven. “Questions of Perception: Phenomenology of Archi-
tecture.” in Questions of Perception: Phenomenology of Archi-
tecture. Tokyo: A + U. 1994. pp 39-119.
Norbeg-Schulz, Christian. Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of
Architecture. New York: Rizzoli. 1984
Pallasmaa, Juhani. “An Architecture of the Seven Senses.” in Ques-
tions of Perception: Phenomenology of Architecture. Tokyo: A +
U. 1994. pp 39-119.
Rilke, Rainer Maria. The Best of Rilke. Walter Arndt, trans. Hanover
and London: University Press of New England. 1989.
Rilke, Rainer Maria. The Complete French Poems of Rainer Maria
Rilke. A Poulin Jr., trans. St. Paul: Gray Wolf Press. 1986.
Reed, Arden. “Signifying Shadows.” in VIA no. 11. Philadelphia: Uni-
versity of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Fine Arts. 1998.
Turrell James. Air Mass. The South Bank Centre. 1993.
Turrell, James. Light and Space. New York: Whitney Museum of
American Art. 1980.
Technical
Benton, Charles C. et. al. “Daylight Commissioning in the Lockheed
Building”. 1988.
Prafcke, Carol. “The Use of Daylight in Traditional Chinese Courtyard
Housing.” Unpublished paper. Minneapolis: University of Min-
nesota.
Ruck, Nancy. “Lighting Design.” in Building Design and Human Per-
formance. Nancy Ruck, ed. New York: Van Norstrand Reinhold.
1989. Chapter 6.
Selkowitz, Steven E. “Effective Daylight in Buildings – Revisited.” in
Lighting Design and Applications. March 1986. pp. 34-47.

Itinerary
Amsoneit, Wolfang. Contemporary European Architects. New York:
Taschen. 1991.
Buchanan, Peter. Renzo Piano Building Workshop Vol. 1 and 2. Lon-
don: Phaidon Press Ltd. 1993.
Carver, Norman F. Form and Space in Japanese Architecture. Kal-
amazoo, MI: Documan Press. 1993.
Cooper, Jackie. Mackintosh Architecture. London: Academy Editions.
1978.
Editorial Blume. Gaudi Designer. Barcelona: I. G. Domingo. 1978.
Futagawa, Yukio, ed. Light & Space: Modern Architecture, Vol. 1 and
2. Tokyo: EDITA Tokyo Co., Ltd. 1994.
Ito, Toyo. Architectural Monographs No. 41: Toyo Ito. London: Acad-
emy Editions. 1995.
Kostof, Spiro. A History of Architecture: Settings and Rituals. New
York: Oxford University Press. 1985.
Levene, Richard C., ed. El Croquis 65/66: Jean Nouvel 1987-1994.
Madrid: Cristina Poveda y Yolanda Muela. 1994.
Moore, Rowan. Structure, Space and Skin: The Work of Nicholas
Grimshaw and Partners. London: Phaidon Press Ltd. 1993.
Pare, Richard. Tadao Ando: The Colours of Light. London: Phaidon
Press Ltd. 1996.
Riley, Terrence. Light Construction. New York: The Museum of Mod-
ern Art. 1995.
Ruusuvori, Aarno. Alvar Alto. Helsinki: Museum of Finnish Archi-
tecture. 1978.
Stierlin, Henry. The Roman Empire, Vol. 1. New York: Taschen. 1996.
Zerbst, Rainer. Antoni Gaudi. New York: Taschen. 1990.

Illustrations
All photos and paintings are by the author.