Z71

THE KIMBELL ART MUSEUM BUILDING

FROM CONCEPT TO COMPLETION

THESIS

Presented to the Graduate Council of the

North Texas State University in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

By

Alice Rebekah Connally, B. S.

Denton, Texas

December, 1977
 Connally, Alice R. , The Kimbell Art Museum Building

From Concept to Completion. Master of Arts (Art History),

December, 1977, 177 pp., 20 illustrations, bibliography,

57 titles.

The problem of this thesis is to determine the evolu-

tion of the architectural design of the Kimbell Art Museum

building from its origin as a concept to its realization

in the completed structure. This study has two objectives.

The first is to discover the process by which the physical

museum building cam into being. The second is to trace the

conceptual evolution of the Kimbell Art Museum building.

This problem has three parts, each of which has been

made the subject of a chapter. The first, "Concept Develop-

ment," sets forth the pre-design concepts of the founder,

the director, and the architect. The second, "Design De-

velopment," establishes a chronological sequence of archai-

tectural design presentations. The third, the "Conclusion,"

compares the pre-design concepts to the finished building.

 PLEASE NOTE:

Photographs on figure pages will not reproduce well.

Filmed best way possible.

UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS -.......... iv

Chapter

INTRODUCTION . ............. 1

I. CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT. . ........ . . . 7

The Founder's Concept . . . 8

.
The Director's Concept . . . 14

.
The Architect's Concept - - - 27

-
II. EVOLUTION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN . . . 42

.
Architectural Contract. . ........ . - 43
First Design Presentation . . . 44
.

Second Design Presentation . .

- - 53
Final Preliminary Design Presentation . - 67
Last Design Revision Before Construction . . 83
Design Revisions During Construction 85

III. CONCLUSION: A COMPARISON OF PRE-DESIGN

CONCEPTS TO FINISHED MUSEUM 110

The Founder's Concept . . . . 110

.

The Director's Concept . . . . 111

.

The Architect's Concept . . . 111

.

APPENDIX A . . . . 124
.

APPENDIX B . . . . 127
.

APPENDIX C . . . . 148
.

APPENDIX D . . . . . . . 159
.

APPENDIX E . . a. 0 .170
.

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . .. . . . . . . . . .6.a.*.* 173

iii
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure Page

1. Site model for first design presentation. . . . . 46

2. Model for first design presentation, plan

view. . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... .47

3. Model for first design presentation, oblique

view. . . . . . . . . . . . ......... 48

4. Model for second design presentation, plan

view. . . . . . . . . . . .......... 55

5. Model for second design presentation, oblique

view. . . . . . . . . . . .......... 57

6. Model and cross-section of cycloid for second

design presentation . . . . . . . . . .... 59

7. Mathematical generation of cycloid curve and

cross-section of cycloid barrel shell . -.-.-. 61

8. Cross-section studies for light reflector-

diffuser . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .... 64

9. Model for final preliminary design presenta-

tion, plan view . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 68

10. Model for final preliminary design presenta-

tion, oblique view. . . . . . . . . . . ... 70

11. Cross-section through north wing for final

preliminary design presentation . . . . . . . 72

12. South Facade, detail: end of cycloid . . . . .. 76

13. Sketch of site plan from Kahn's letter to

Mrs. Kimbell. . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 84

14. Plan, Gallery Level . . . . . . . . . . ..... 90

15. Plan, Operations Level . . . . . . . . . . ... 94

16. Construction of Library- mezzanine floor . . . 99

iv
Figure Page

17. Conservation Laboratory, detail: light court. . 101

18. Aerial view of completed museum........ . 107

19. South Gallery, detail: soffit . . ....... 119

20. Entrance Lobby, detail: storage wall behind

bookstore............................... . 121

V
 INTRODUCT ION

On October 4, 1972, the formal opening of the Kimbell

Art Museum was celebrated. Eight years had passed since

the death of Kay Kimbell, whose Last Will and Testament had

set into motion a remarkable process which culminated in an

award-winning building designed by an internationally famous

architect, the late Louis I. Kahn.

The founder of the Kimbell Art Museum, Kay Kimbell, had

amassed a great fortune during his lifetime despite his

modest beginnings. Born in Oakwood, Texas, in 1886, Kimbell

left school at the age of thirteen to work for his father

who employed himself variously as a farmer, cotton dealer,

and merchant. Kay Kimbell shunned publicity about how he

managed to begin with a small flour milling plant in Sherman,

Texas, and expanded his business to eventually include

seventy corporations in wholesale foods, petroleum process-

ing, insurance, and real estate.1

Kay Kimbell and his wife, Velma, began collecting art

during the 1930's after attending an exhibition held by the

Fort Worth Art Association. Enchanted by the British eigh-

teenth century works in the show, Kimbell purchased a paint-

ing from New York gallery owner, Bertram Newhouse. During

1Kay Kimbell 1886-1965 (Kimbell Art Museum, 1972) pam-

phlet, p. 1-2.

1
 2

the years that followed, Kimbell's love of art grew and his

collection was expanded. In addition to new acquisitions

of British eighteenth century painting, Kay and Velma Kim-

bell bought many fine examples of late Renaissance, French

nineteenth century, and American art.

In 1936, the Kimbell Art Foundation was established by

Kay and Velma Kimbell and Coleman Carter and his wife. The

legal document which brought the foundation into existence

is entitled the "Articles of Incorporation of the Kimbell

Art Foundation." The foundation served as an owner for the

art and wealth that would be bestowed upon it by Kay Kimbell

during his life as tax-deductible gifts and after his death

as his estate. The purpose of the Kimbell Art Foundation

was "to establish and maintain in the City of Fort Worth an

art institute."2 This institution was to be operated with-

out fees as a non-profit organization, and if, in the future,

its corporate existence were terminated, it would become the

property of the City of Fort Worth.3

In the years that followed the establishment of the

foundation, the Kimbell collection grew to contain a great

many works of art including examples by Gainsborough, Rey-

nolds, Romney, Lawrence, Leighton, Greuze, Van Dyck, Hals,

El Greco, Canaletto, and Corot.4 Paintings owned by the

2 Fort Worth Star-Telegram, November 9, 1964.

3 Ibid.
4 Ibid.
 3

foundation were placed in public institutions including

Texas Christian University, Texas Women's University, Ar-

lington State College, and the Fort Worth Public Library.

Kimbell's desire to share his art with the public led him
mandate for
to provide the financial resources and legal
Art
the institution that was to bear his name, the Kimbell

Museum.
de-
The problem with which this thesis is concerned is
the
termining the evolution of the architectural design of

Kimbell Art Museum building from its origin as a concept in

the minds of the founder, the director, and the architect to

its realization in the completed structure. This study has

two objectives. The first is to discover the process by

which the physical museum building came into being. The

second is to trace the conceptual evolution of the Kimbell

Art Museum.

Method of Procedure

The design evolution is presented in two chapters. The

first, "Concept Development," sets forth the pre-design

concepts of the founder, Kay Kimbell; the director, Richard

F. Brown; and the architect, Louis I. Kahn. The second

chapter, "Design Development," established a chronological

design
sequence of design presentations and accounts for the
In the conclusion, a comparison
changes made at each stage.

is made of the pre-design concepts and the finished building.

 4

To determine Kimbell's concept of the museum, an exami-

nation was made of his Last Will and Testament. Personal

interviews with museum staff and board members provided fur-

ther insight into Kimbell's intentions. To determine Richard

Brown's concept of the museum, a study was made of the

"Policy Statement" and the "Pre-Architectural Program," two

unpublished papers written by Brown in 1966. This investi-

gation was augmented by Brown's statements taken from both

personal interviews and periodicals. My findings on Louis

Kahn's conception of the museum were based on personal inter-

views and correspondence with Marshall D. Meyers, the project

architect from Kahn's office. A study was made of the archi-

tect's design philosophy as recorded in his speeches and

writing.

Design development was determined by three methods.

First, an examination was made of all available models and

drawings which constituted Kahn's design presentations.

Second, interviews were held with individuals involved with

all stages of design and construction. Third, letters and

contract documents written during the design period were

correlated with the visual presentation material.

Sign-ificance of the Problem

The significance of the Kimbell Art Museum, both as a

work of architecture and as an institution, justifies an

investigation into the origin and evolution of its archi-

tectural design. Recipient of the 1975 Honor Award of the

 5

American Institute of Architects, the museum building is

recognized as an important contribution to the history of

architecture. This record will be valuable because it not

only documents the design methodology of Louis Kahn, but it

also records the conceptualization of a major work of twen-

tieth century architecture. It is important that this

investigation be made before primary source material becomes

unavailable. With the death of Louis Kahn in 1974 there is

a need to record accounts of his words and thoughts expressed

to his colleagues while the memory of them is still fresh.

.Review of the Literature

The design evolution of the Kimbell Art Museum has been

treated in part by articles and books published from 1968 to

the present. An article by Peter Plagens entitled, "Louis

Kahn's New Museum in Fort Worth," describes and illustrates

Kahn's second design presentation.5 It also outlines features

of the architect's philosophy and methodology of design.

An analysis of the influence of beaux arts training on

Kahn's design procedure appeared in an article by William

6
Jordy entitled "The Span of Kahn." Jordy provides insight

into Kahn's method of design and analyzes certain features

of both Kahn's and Brown's concept of the museum.

Eighteen Years With Architect Louis I. Kahn, a book

5
Peter Plagens, "Louis Khan's New Musuem in Fort Worth,"
Artforum, VI (February, 1968).
6 WilliamH. Jordy, "The Span of Kahn," Architectural
Review, CLV (June, 1974).
 6

written and published by structural engineer August Komendant,

discusses the design and engineering of the Kimbell Art

Museum. Komendant traces the changes in both plan and

structure of the building from 1968 when he was first con-

sulted by Kahn to the completion of the museum in 1972.

Although Komendant focuses on engineering, he was intimate

enough with Kahn to analyze the changes in the architect's

philosophical conept of the museum during these years.

Light is the Theme is the only publication which corre-

lates Kahn's design concepts with architectural form.8 This

book was conceived and titled by Kahn himself. The archi-

tect's words are juxtaposed with photographs taken during

and after construction of the museum.

Articles published in technical journals focus on the un-

usual construction techniques developed for the Kimbell Art

Museum such as the forms for casting the cycloid shells, the

laying of the lead roof, and the development of the unique

light reflectors. Other periodicals have published photo-

graphs, architectural drawings, and statistics. Although many

books and articles have dealt with specific aspects of the con-

cept, design,and construction of the Kimbell Art Museum,. no

publication has addressed the problem of determining the evolu-

tion of the architectural design from concept to completion.

7 August Komendant, Eighteen Years With Architect Louis

I. Kahn, (Englewood, New Jersey, 1975).

I. Kahn, Light is the Theme:

8 Louis Louis *I. Kahn and
the Kimbell Art Museum; Comments on Architecture by Louis Kahn,
compiled by Nell E. Johnson, Fort Worth, Kimbell Art Foundation,
1975.
 CHAPTER I

CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

The philosophical foundation for the Kimbell Art Museum

is to be found in the initiating concept of the founder, the

museum goals of the director, and the design philosophy of

the architect. These concepts are worth examining carefully

because, first, the ideas in themselves are noteworthy con-

tributions to the general notion of what an art museum should

be, and second, these concepts determined to a large extent

the final form of an important work of architecture.

Founder Kay Kimbell's initiating concept is most signif-

icant for its restraint. In his Last Will and Testament he

yielded his power to determine the form and operation of the

institution for which he had provided, thereby allowing these

basic decisions to be made by a professional museum adminis-

trator. Richard F. Brown's goals for the museum are to be

found in his "Policy Statement" and "Pre-Architectural

Program," a document unique for its thoroughness and client

authorship. In writing his own building program, Brown has

established an excellent precedent for museum directors.

Louis I. Kahn's philosophy of architecture, widely quoted

by critics, would have been considered a contribution to

twentieth century architecture even if he had never produced

7
 8

a building. Some of the design concepts Kahn realized in

the Kimbell Art Museum had been in his mind several years

before being commissioned for the project.

The Founder ' s Concept

Upon the death of Kay Kimbell in April of 1964, his

Last Will and Testament became effective.1 The Kimbell will

was remarkable in that it provided extensive financial re-

sources for implementing the purpose of the Kimbell Art

Foundation -- "to establish and maintain in the City of Fort

Worth an art institute" -- but it did not place any restric-

tions on the institution that was to be built. Kimbell's

expression of his intentions can be found in Article One of

the Last Will and Testament.

I have no children, nor have I ever had any. I

have provided amply for all of my relatives. I,
therefore, feel entirely free to attempt to achieve
a long-felt ambition - to encourage art in Fort
Worth and Texas by providing paintings and other
meritorious works of art for public display, study,
and observation in suitable surroundings. The in-
tent of this Will, after providing for my beloved
wife, VELMA KIMBELL, is to further such purpose.3

The phrase "suitable surroundings" is the only reference to

a museum building contained in the will. Thus Kimbell did

1 SeeAppendix A, p. 124. The Kimbell Last Will and

Testament was contested by six relatives who were represented
by Attorneys Al Winder and Melvin Belli. Belli is the lawyer
from San Francisco who unsuccessfully defended Jack Ruby in
the shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald. Fort Worth Press, Novem-
ber 9, 1964).
2 Fort Worth Star-Telegram, p. 3.
3
Kay Kimbell, Last Will and Testament, extract, Article
One. See Appendix, p. 124.
 9

not in any way specify the appearance or scope of the art

facilities which would bear his name. The frequently quoted

4.
statement, "build a museum of the first class," is. not re-

corded in the actual will, but was frequently repeated to

the executors and business associates. Note that Kimbell

did not even require that his own paintings be exhibited in

this institution.

The will placed the Kimbell estate in a trust fund to

be used by the Kimbell Art Foundation for the purpose of

building and staffing the Kimbell Art Museum as well as ex-

panding the art collection. Kimbell defined his estate as

"my separate properties and the entire community estate of

"5
my wife, Velma Kimbell, and me." To administer his estate,

Kimbell appointed a board of executors to whom he gave au-

thority "To sell or dispose of, for cash or on credit, ex-

change, partition with co-owners, liquidate and convert any

-6
and all properties of my estate."' Thus all of the art

owned by Kay Kimbell at the time of his death could have been

4Fort Worth Star-Telegram, p. 2. This article re-

ports that VElma Kimbellisaid that the building should be
in keeping with the other public buildings in the surround-
ing area.
5
Kay Kimbell, op. cit, p. 1.
6
Ibid., p. 13. The executors of the estate were as
follows: Velma Kimbell, Coleman Carter whose late wife was
Kay Kimbell's sister, Kay Fortson who was Kay Kimbell's
niece, A. L. Scott who is President of Kimbell Milling Co.,
C. B. Smith who is head of the neat division of Kimbell Mill-
ing Co., and Benjamin Bird who is attorney for the Kimbell
Art Foundation.
 10

sold and replaced by new acquisitions.

However, the sale of Kimbell properties was not really

necessary in order to produce funds for building the Kimbell

Art Museum. The income generated by the assets of the es-

tate was intended by Kimbell to be used for this purpose.

All net income received by my estate during ad-

ministration shall be paid to or permanently set
aside for "The Foundation," to be used exclusively
for its educational and charitable purposes. 7

To augment these funds, Velma Kimbell graciously donated her

entire share of community property to the Kimbell Art Foun-

dation.

If Kay Kimbell had a visual image or theoretical con-

cept of the kind of art institution he wanted, he did not

specify it in his will. The importance of this fact for the

development of the architectural design of the Kimbell Art

Museum can scarcely be overstated. Kimbell's restraint in

the wording of his Last Will and Testament provided the exec-

utors of the estate with almost unlimited options, the

director with an open field in the selection of architect

and in the planning of the building, and the architect with

a great opportunity to realize his creative potential. Thus

the Kimbell Art Museum, unlike many institutions, began its

development without design restrictions imposed by its foun-

der.

The implementation of the Last Will and Testament of

Ibid.
 11

Kay Kimbell was the duty of the executors. In addition to

the disposition of the Kimbell estate, the executors were

responsible for acquiring a site and selecting a director

for the future museum.

Acquiring the Site

The Kimbell will specified only that the museum be

within the City of Fort Worth. The executors were therefore

at liberty to make their own decision about the site. The

matter was brought before the Fort Worth City Council on

November 8, 1964, by Benjamin Bird, attorney for the founda-

tion. The city council voted quickly and unanimously to

donate nine-and-one--half acres of park land opposite the

Amon Carter Museum of Western Art for the project. To make

the site usable, the existing Will Rogers Road East which

cut the site in half had to be closed. The cost of the de-

velopment of the site was to be paid for the Kimbell Art

Foundation. This site was bound by Arch Adams on the east,

Camp Bowie on the north, West Lancaster on the south, and

Will Rogers Road West on the west. The donation of city

property for the museum building was formalized in a contract

between the Kimbell Art Foundation and the city of Fort Worth.

This agreement stated that the museum was to be operated with-

out profit, but that if it became necessary to cover operat-

ing expenses, an entrance fee could be charged.8

8 Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

 12

Selecting the Director

Having had no experience with organizing an art museum,

the trustees turned first to successful museum directors to

learn how such an institution is established. On a tour of

the nation's leading art museums, the executors were advised

that their first act should be to hire a highly competent

museum administrator as director.19 Executor Kay Fortson

recalled that on more than one occasion they were told that

they would be most fortunate if they could persuade Richard

F. Brown, then director of the Los Angeles County Museum, to

take this post.

Richard F. Brown's education and experience qualified

him as an art museum administrator. While working on his

doctorate at Harvard University, Brown was invited to be a

research scholar and later a lecturer at the Frick Collection

in New York City. In 1954 he was asked to be curator of the

Los Angeles County Museum of History, Science and Art. Then

in 1961 just as a new art center was being planned for this

institution, Brown was made director.' By the time the

The museums visited were. the Putnam Foundation in

San Diego, the Huntington in San Marino, the National Gallery
of Art in Washington, D.C., the Boston Musuem of Fine Arts,
the Philadelphia Musuem of Art, the Metropolitan Museum of
Art and the Frick Collection in New York, and the Sterling
and Francine Clark Museum in Williamstown, Massachusetts.
10
Statement by Kay Fortson, Executor of Kimbell Estate,
.t Kimbell Art Museum, February 11, 1976.
11
Richard F. Shepard, "After a Six-Year Honeymoon, the
Kimbell Art Museum," Artnews, LXXI (October, 1972), 31.
 13

Kimbell executors approached him in 1965, he had had experi-

ence not only in directing but also in building a major art

museum. Initially he was asked to come to Fort Worth as an

authority on eighteenth century painting to evaluate the

Kimbell collection and advise the executors as to whether

the paintings were of sufficient quality to exhibit in the

12
planned art institution.' A short time later Brown was

offered the directorship of the Kimbell Art Museum, and he

accepted. It had become apparent to Brown that, unlike the

board of trustees of the Los Angeles County Museum, the Kim-

bell executors planned to give to their director unqualified

authority with regard to the building and administration of

the museum.13

The means employed by the executors of the Kimbell es-

tate in the founding of a great museum reflect the spirit as

well as the letter of the Kimbell Last Will and Testament.

Following Kay Kimbell's example, the executors did not vest

themselves with the authority to define quality in a museum,

or even to decide by themselves who should define such quali-

ty; rather, they sought advice from a wide range of acknow-

ledged experts in the field, then acted upon that advice.

12 Statement by Francis Robb, Art Historian, author of

numerous entries in the Kimbell Art Museum Catalogue_ of the
Collection, Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas, October 10,
1976.

Shepard, op. cit., p. 22. Fort Worth was not an un-

familiar city to Brown. He had.served on the board of the
Amon Carter Museum of Western Art.
 14

The Director's Concept

Richard F. Brown's general philosophy of the Kimbell

Art Museum can be found in three sources, all of which

Brown wrote. In the "Policy Statement," June, 1966, Brown
recorded the purpose of the museum as an institution;
in the
"Pre-Architectural Program," June, 1966, he set forth his
architectural concept for the museum building; and in the
Introduction to the Kimbell Art Museum Catalogue of the
Col-
lection, 1972, Brown reveals his theory of developing the

art collection. These three contexts in which Brown articu-

lates his philosophy of the Kimbell Art Museum are by no

means mutually exclusive. The design concept is an outgrowth

of the purpose of the institution as is the collection of

works of art. At the same time, the design affects the in-

stallation of the art which in turn affects the visitor's

perception of the purpose of the institution. This network

of interrelated concepts forms a kind of fabric of ideals

upon which the institution as a whole is founded.

Purpose of the Institution

In the "Policy Statement" Brown states that the purpose

of the Kimbell Art Museum is to provide "cultural enrichment

of the public through the display and interpretation of works

of art." "Our knowledge and understanding of the heritage of

14
Kimbell Art Museum, "Policy Statement," Fort Worth,
June 1, 1966. See Appendix B, p. 128.
 15

civilization is largely dependent upon the continued survi-

val of the. kind of art contained in this museum.," 1 5 Further,

Brown feels strongly that in an economy based on mass pro-

duction, "the need for single, unique, handmade, emotionally

and intellectually distilled works of art should be self-

evident. "'16

The "Policy Statement" also includes a statement of the

top priority for museum operations: the preservation of

works of art. In this document, Brown explains that in order

for the purpose of the museum to be fulfilled now and in the

future, every precaution must be taken with the works of art

entrusted to its care. 17 Making preservation a top priority

affected every aspect of the institution, namely, the design

of the building, the installation of the works of art, the
exhibition program, the security operations, the mechanical

equipment, and the facilities for conservation and research.

To assure that no future concern might supercede the protec-

tion of works of art, Brown made it a museum policy that

"every other aspect of the Museum's program pays obeisance

to and, where necessary, gives way to this trust.1" 1 8

15Ibid.

16 "The Kimbell Museum:

Art and Etiquette," Texas Metro,
XL (October, 1970), 32.
17
Kimbell Art Museum, "Policy Statement." See Appen-
dix B, p. 130.
18 Ibid.
 16

The director translated this priority into design re-

quirements in the "Pre-Architectural Program." Not only did

Brown specify the best security equipment available, but he

insured further protection in his suggestions for the organi-

zation of the building and by limiting the entrances and

accessible glass walls.

Architectural Concept

Richard Brown's concept of the Kimbell Art Museum as a

work of architecture is to be found in the "Pre-Architectural

Program," dated June 1, 1966. An unpublished sixteen-page

document written by Brown, the "Pre-Architectural Program"

is a prime example of a building program, a statement pre-

pared by an architect or owner before architectural design

begins. Usually a program contains general objectives for

a building as well as specific requirements such as a list

of rooms which are described in terms of approximate

size,
location, and special facilities. Usually the program is

written by the architect in consultation with the client.

Richard F. Brown, however, had had sufficient experience with

museum architecture to write the Kimbell program before se-

lecting the architect. By mailing copies to the architects

under consideration in advance of his interviews, the direc-

tor gained the advantage of a specific, rather than a general,
discussion of the building he had in mind.

The "Pre-Architectural Program" consists of ten sections

which provide three kinds of information: the director's

 17

concept of the architectural design, an analysis of design

and
problems, and the detailed particulars of space use

square foot cost. It is so unusual for a client to provide

this kind of information and analysis that the "Pre-Architec-

tural Program" was praised by a major periodical, Progressive

Architecture, as

A model of pre-programming for clients and archi-

tects alike...If such painstaking and perceptive
documents were the rule, museum design would take
19
an immeasurably improved turn.

Design concept.--The material in the "Pre-Architectural

falls into three
Program" which covers Brown's design concept

categories: the subjective experience of the visitor, the

aesthetic features of the building, and the security consi-

derations.

Richard F. Brown wanted the visitor entering the museum

charmed.
to be enriched, educated, and so that he will return,

Ideally he should experience "warmth, mellowness, even ele-

the
gance."20 Brown hoped that the visitor would find that

architecture, although itself a work of art, does not over-

2
whelm the objects on exhibit.. 1

The aesthetic features which concerned Brown were scale,

l9C .Ray Smith, "The Great Museum Debate," Progressive

Architecture, L (December, 1969), 85.
2 0 Kimbell Art Museum, "Pre-Architectural Program," Fort
Worth, June 1, 1966. See Appendix B, p. 132.
21
Ibid.
 18

materials, construction details, lighting, and composition.

The program called for the Kimbell Art Museum to be human in

scale. It was to be villa-like, not palatial, similar to

the Frick Collection in New York where Brown had been curator.

The gallery ceilings were to be only twelve feet high.2 2 How-

ever, the museum was not to have period settings for works of
23
art.

The museum was to have a harmony of textures and forms

and a high quality of craftsmanship and materials. Brown be-

lieved there should be an honesty in the relationship of

visible form and method of construction. The floor plan

should be easily grasped so that the visitor feels that he

is making his own choices as he walks through the galleries.24

Natural light must play an important role in illuminating

the interior of the museum. Brown believed that the visitor

should be able to catch a glimpse of the natural changes in

weather, time of day, and seasons. On the other hand, the

director demanded a lighting solution which would avoid glare,

diffused skylighting, multiple light sources, fluorescent

fixtures, or clerestory windows, yet not deplete the wall

space. This was a big order. It exhausted all standard

5
lighting techniques.2

Finally, the Kimbell Art Museum building was to be a

totally integrated design when finished. The composition was

22 Ibid, p. 140. 24 Ibid, p. 133.

2 3 25 Ibid, p. 145.
Ibid p. 132.
 19

to have a wholeness that would make additions not only un-

necessary but undesirable. The structure was not to be

built in stages that could grow with the collection, but

was to be complete at the time of opening.2 6

Because the preservation of works of art is given top

priority in Kimbell Art Museum operations,27 all architec-

tural features which could facilitate security were requested

in the program. For example, Brown feels that security is

8
best served if an art museum has only one public entrance. 2

Likewise, there were to be as few exterior doors as possible.

Another concern was the separation of museum activities. By

dividing all activities into three groups -- service, public,

and operations -- and by requesting that each group be spa-

tially isolated,2 9 Brown was insuring that the architectural

design would result in a secure museum. Thus the shipping,

receiving, crating, examining, and conservation of art could

be done without public awareness; and the observation

62 I bid, p. 133.
In an interview held at the Kimbell Art
Museum December 18, 1975, Richard Brown recalled a discussion
he had with Kahn about plans for future extension of the
museum. Kahn's scheme was as follows: The walls which
surround the parking lots would be continued to the west
end of the site, where they would enclose a structure con-
sisting of two buildings composed of cycloids and joined
to each other by a portico open on all four sides.
2 7 See page 12 above.
2 8 Kimbell
Art Museum, "Pre-Architectural Program." See
Appendix B., p. 139.
2 9 Ibid, p. 136.
 20

duties of security guards was to be made simpler by the iso-

lation of public activities.

Design analysis.--In an unusual feature of the "Pre-

Architectural Program,'" Brown provides analysis of the design

problems posed by the constraints of the site: location,

surroundings, and height limitation.

The location of the museum in a city in which the pri-

mary means of transportation is by automobile, rather than

by mass transit, imposed the need for a large parking lot

on the museum grounds. Based on an anticipated annual atten-

dance of two hundred thousand visitors, it was estimated that

parking for one hundred cars would be required. 3 0

The nature of the developed land surrounding the museum

site posed design problems. Only the west boundary had an

attractive vista: the tree-lined city park land and Amon

Carter Museum of Western Art. On the east were apartment

buildings; on the north, small business structures; and on

the south, Lancaster field. Brown's suggestions for dealing

with the surrounding site were 1) the use of an inward ori-

entation of the building, and 2) an imaginative landscaping

scheme.31

A height restriction of forty feet had been agreed upon

by the Kimbell executors when the donation of the city park

land was accepted as the building site. The purpose of this

restriction was to avoid obstructing the view' of the surround-

3 0 Ibid, 31 Ibid.
p. 135.
 21

ing area from the terrace of the existing Amon Carter Museum

of Western Art. Brown felt that this restriction would en-

tail two important considerations by the architect: 1) the

appearance of the roof would take on such importance that

careful consideration would have to be given to its treat-

ment and 2) excavation would probably be necessary so that

a lower level of the museum could be built below grade. 3 2

Space use.--The bulk of the "Ire-Architectural Program"

consists of a list of the number of square feet and the pro-

jected cost per square feet for each specific building

activity. This list was divided into three sections which

correspond to Brown's three major divisions of the museum:

service, public, and operations.

On the gallery level, Brown asked for an architectural

layout in which objects are seen in sequence in a controlled

field of vision.33 In a special loan gallery designed for

changing exhibitions of differing sizes, the space was to be
divisible lengthwise into small units. Means of access to

this loan gallery was to be provided at a number of points

along its longest wall. This schem. would allow exhibitions

of various sizes to be installed without blocking the en-

trance. The north longitudinal wall of this gallery was to

be of glass with sliding opaque walls permitting light modu-

lation according to the requirements of the exhibits. 3 4

32 3
Ibid. Ibid. 34 Ibid, p. 140.
 22

The operations area of the museum was to have offices

and research facilities as required for the function of the

administrative, curatorial, and education departments. In-

cluded among these were the library and the conservation

studio.

The service area was to have a parking lot placed under

the building or on a constructed terrace. The entrance to

this parking area was to be mechanized and operable by secur-

ity staff. This controlled parking entry would have served

both service vehicles and private cars. There was to be a

stairway and an elevator from the parking lot to the
main
level of the museum.3 6

The above description of the adjustable loan gallery

and the vehicle parking facility, neither of which appear in

any of Kahn's designs, reveal that Brown had a detailed de-

sign concept of the museum. The "Pre-Architectural Program"

contained both his philosophy of the museum as an institu-

tion and his design concept of the building.

Selection of the Architect

As museum director, Richard Brown was responsible for

selecting and recommending an architect who could transform

the concepts set forth in the "Pre-Architectural Program"

35
Ibid, p. 142. Note that in the finished building, the
library is in the public level.

3 6 Ibid,
p. 137.
 23

into reality. To accomplish this task, Brown

submitted the
program to fifteen distinguished
architects, including Paul
Rudolf, Gordon Bunshaft of
Skidmore, Owens, and Merril,
John
Johanson, Edward Larabie Barnes,
Mies van der Rohe, I. M.
Pei, Marcel Breuer, and Louis
Kahn.37 After six months of
visiting these and other architects
and discussing the "Pre-
Architectural Program" with
them, Brown recommended to the
Kimbell board of trustees3 8
that Louis Kahn be offered the
commission of designing the
new museum. The trustees voted
immediately to approve Brown's
choice, not from familiarity
with Kahn as an architect, but
from their complete confidence
in Brown as a museum administrator.3 9

Brown has stated that his basis

for selecting Kahn was
the suitability of the architect's
work to the Fort Worth
area. Mies van der Rohe, whom Brown
had wanted as architect
for the Los Angeles County Museum,
typically designed sophis-
ticated glass structures more
suitable for a metropolitan
environment in a cool climate than
for the Fort Worth region.4 0
Speaking of the younger architects
John Johanson and Edward
Larabie Barnes, Brown said that
after examining their models

37Statement by Richard F.
Brown, Director, Kimbell Art
Museum, Fort Worth, Texas, July
23, 1975.
38 T.ihe word "trustees"
is used from this point on
the disposition of the Kimbelluestate because
had been completed. In
addition to the original executors,
the trustees include Ben
J. Fortson, husband of Kay
Fortson.
39Statement by Richard
F. Brown, July 23, 1975.
40
Ibid.
 24

and studying their finished buildings, "I still felt that

Lou Kahn was younger than they were and had a
fresher atti-
tude about any new problem... I felt Louis Kahn would
approach
this problem like Adam, for the first time, and indeed that's
the way it turned out." 4 1 Further insight into the director's
reasons for selecting Kahn may be gained from an
unpublished
account written by Brown after his first meeting with
the
architect. Brown's paper records impressions and insights

about the architect's character which he considered

impor-
tant (See Appendix C, p. 157).

The opening paragraphs of this unpublished paper

de-
scribe the informal appearance and casual atmosphere
of the
Kahn office. 4 Brown felt that the unpretentious nature of
the workroom reflected the architect's dedication
to his
work and his concern for design rather than a preoccupation

with image and the display of importance. The work area had
the quality more of an artist's atelier than
of an influen-
tial architect's office. Discussion was always open and
varied, involving not just the projects at
hand, but also
philosophy, books, mathematics, travel, etc. People often
stayed at work all night, stopping only in
the early morning
hours for a snack. Kahn would always arrive the following

morning at eight-thirty regardless of how late he had

been

"Kahn's Museum: An Interview with Richard F.

Brown,"
Art in America, LX (September-October, 1972) ,
44.
42 Richard
F. Brown, "Statement: Louis I. Kahn," unpub-
lished paper, Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas, 1972.
See Appendix C, p. 148-50.
 25

at work the night before. The atmosphere of dedicated in-

volvement identified Kahn as an artist-philosopher-architect

rather than a businessman-architect: an important decision

to Brown.

This distinction was reinforced by the discussion of

architecture which took place between Brown and Kahn. Both

men had traveled extensively and both had a keen appreciation

for architectural history. When Brown explained that he

wanted the Kimbell Art Museum to be similar in certain ways

to a specific building in Europe, Kahn knew exactly what he

meant (See Appendix C, p.151).4 3

Brown believed that Louis Kahn would pursue a design

solution for the Kimbell Art Museum with relentless origi-

nality rather than a reliance on past solutions or pre-

conceived ideas about what a museum building should be. 4 4

Note also that Kahn left Brown with the impression that

"economy is an all-pervading attitude of operations,

design
and building process." 45

Finally, and most important, was the quality of light

in Kahn's office. Brown had written into the "Pre-

Architectural Program" a very complex set of requirements

for natural illumination within the museum. Kahn had modu-

lated and controlled the natural light in highly dramatic

and inventive ways in his architectural design for the

43 Ibid, p. 134-35. 44 45
Ibid, p. 135. Ibid.
 26

Presidential Plaza and for the Outpatient

Clinic of the
National Hospital, both in Dacca, Bangladesh.
So it was
with great optimism that Brown approached
Kahn. When Brown
saw that the architect had chosen an office
the only redeem-
ing feature of which was the light, it was the final reassur-
ance that there would be no problem
in communicating about
this subject.

The light in all these spaces is matchless,

and
for Lou Kahn light is the great creator
of all
things, including architecture. With such superb
light to work with, why should he move
into fan-
cier quarters?4 6

In selecting Louis Kahn as architect of

the Kimbell Art
Museum, Brown chose one of the most difficult
options open
to him. He easily could have selected an architect
who
would design a building that would have
satisfied the require-
ment in the Kimbell Last Will and Testament for "suitable
surroundings." 47 Vincent Scully, Kahn's biographer and
renowned art historian, warned that Kahn
is "not for the
faint-hearted" but for "wise and courageous
clients who are
willing to forego the gloss of superficial
perfection in
order to take part in a sustained and demanding
process."48
Brown's decision to commission Kahn, along with his "Pre-
Architectural Program," must be considered
major contribu-
tions to the creation of the Kimbell Art
Museum.

46
Ibid, p. 134.
47Kimbell, cit.op.
See Appendix A, p. 124,
48Vincent Scully, "Light Form,
and Power: New Work of
Louis Kahn," Architectural Forum, CXIX
(August, 1964), 163.
 27

The Architect's Design Philosophy

During Louis Kahn's many years of teaching architecture,

he developed a highly complex and personal philosophy of

design. Although Kahn's philosophy encompassed many aspects

of architecture, city planning, and man's general experience

of his environment, only those concepts which have the

greatest bearing on the design of the Kimbell Art Museum are

discussed in this thesis.

One of the problems that must be confronted in the study

of Kahn's theories is the architect's use of language. Kahn

often invented words or applied to existing words his own,

new definitions. In an article in the issue of Architectural

Review which is devoted entirely to Kahn's work, William

Jordy defended Kahn on this point.

Like so many great teachers, Kahn tended to use

words as the veil to a mystery, rather than as a
clarification of truth. This is not indeed a
criticism of him. It was one of the great errors
of the Modern Movement to give it out that archi-
tecture was an "easy" subject; and that its pro-
blems were to be solved by a simple process of
discussion and calculation.4 9

The problem of Kahn's diction stemmed from the architect's

tendency to reject contemporary explanations of cultural

institutions and practices. He voiced this rejection, too,

in speaking of "volume zero, "5 0 the unwritten book which

49 Jordy, op. cit., p. 320.

50
Patricia McLaughlin, "How'm I Doing, Corbusier?" The
Pennsylvania Gazette, LXXI (December, 1972), 20.
 28

precedes the first volume in a set of encyclopedias covering

the history of mankind. Kahn implied that his imaginary

"volume zero" would have outlined the origin of man's insti-

tutions. Determined to discover for himself the origin and

basic essence of man's institutions, Kahn assumed for himself

the responsibility of looking at everything around him as if

he were the first to perceive it. Because this discipline

gave him insights and feelings for which he could not find

precise definitions, he made the best use he could of avail-

able language. In the discussion below, the presentation of

Kahn's concepts and the definition of Kahn's term for these

concepts become one and the same. Eight general concepts

are discussed in this section. The first three concepts--

"the unmeasurable," "reprogramming," and the "natural working

order"--are related to Kahn's design methodology. The next

four concepts--"served and servant spaces," "the Architecture

of Connection," natural light, and natural materials -- are

features which Kahn sought to incorporate into all of the

buildings he designed and, at the same time, are features

which Kahn used very successfully in the Kimbell Art Museum.

The last concept discussed is Kahn's idea of using the archi-

tectural elements of the Kroller Muller Museum in Otterlo,

Netherlands.

The Unmeasurable

To Kahn the most important goal of the architect is to

produce a building that conveys to the visitor an abstract

 29

message such as silence, light, or celebration. This most

important quality is the spiritual essence of that
work of
architecture. Kahn called this quality "the unmeasurable."

A great building must, in my opinion, begin with

the unmeasurable and go through the measurable
in the process of design, but must again in the
end be unmeasurable.

What is unmeasurable is the psychic spirit.

I sense that the psychic Existence Will calls on

Nature to make that which it wants to be. b

Note in the above quotations that Kahn believes

that the un-
measurable essence of a work of architecture exists
before
the structure is built. The architect must discover it. He
does not invent such a quality and then endow the
building
with it. Thus Kahn asks himself the question, "What does
this space want to be?"52

Richard Brown said that Kahn found the

unmeasurable,
or essential nature of a building in the very process
of
designing it. This process of finding the unmeasurable was

what Kahn called "reprogramming."

Reprogramming
The word "reprogramming,"53 coined by Kahn, essentially

means redesigning. It is based on the word "program," which

Richard Saul Wurman and Eugene Feldman (editors),

Notebooks and Drawings of Louis I. Kahn The
(Cambridge, hass.,
1973), no pagination. Wurman is a practicing Philadelphia
architect.
52
Susan Braudy, "The Architectural Metaphysics
of Louis
Kahn," The New York Times Magazine (November 15,
1970, p. 73.
53
Richard F. Brown, "Statement: Louis I. Kahn." See
Appendix C, p. 152.
 30

is the name of the written document that describes the

criteria a building must meet to satisfy the client's needs.

By using the word "reprogramming" rather than "redesigning,"

Kahn implied that he established new criteria for a new de-

sign and not just a new design to satisfy the criteria of

the program. Kahn's new criterion was the unmeasurable.

What exactly did the process of reprogramming entail?

According to engineer August Komendant, whom Kahn often con-

sulted, the arthitect went through a question-answer ritual

with himself in order to determine the unmeasurable.5 4 In

the case of the Kimbell Art Museum, Kahn's questions might

have been "what is the essential nature of an art musuem?

What should its spaces evoke?" The concept of "evoke" was

central to Kahn's philosophy. He felt that, rather than

"form follows function, form evokes function, "55 and "rooms

must suggest their use without name." 5 6

Complicating matters, Kahn believed that the architect

could not completely determine the unmeasurable essence of

a building in the design stage, but that he must continue to

discover it during construction. Kahn felt that the archi-

tect must work as a sculptor works with wood or clay, taking

54
Komendant, op. cit., p. 118.
55
Walter McQuade, "Architect Louis Kahn and his Strong-
Boned Structures," Architectural Forum, CVII (October,
1957),
137.
56
Louis I. Kahn, "The Room, the Street and Human Agree-
ment," AIA Journal, LXVI (September, 1971), 21.
 31

clues from the object produced as to how it should be

shaped. It was this method of design that Kahn was refer-

ring to when he said that a building would tell him what it

wanted to become.57 Despite the problems caused by Kahn's

reprogramming, Richard Brown wrote about the process with a

certain sense of humor:

...his entire approach to finding design solu-

tions lies in what he calls euphemistically
"reprogramming." He reprograms the program;
then reprograms the schematics; then reprograms
the preliminaries; then reprograms the working
drawings. Even as concrete and steel and glass
go up, reprogramming goes on.5 8

Kahn's use of reprogramming, however, was not sympathe-

tically received by all who were involved with the project.

The board of trustees, composed largely of business execu-

tives, took a dim view of Kahn's tendency to disregard

deadlines and to revise designs. The associate architect,

Preston Geren, whose name was associated with many important

buildings in Fort Worth and other Texas cities, was accus-

tomed to efficiency in the handling of architectural pro-

jects. He expected to develop only one set of architectural

57 Richard F. Brown, "Statement: Louis I. Kahn,"

58
Ibid.
59
5Cited for excellence by the American Institute of Ar-
chitects for Robert E. Lee High School of Midland, the Bank
of North Texas in North-Richland Hills, the Student Center
at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, and the Ameri-
can Airlines Stewardess College at Greater Southwest Airport.
Geren was associate architect for the Dallas-Fort Worth In-
terregional Airport with Helmut, Obata, Kassabaum & Brodsky,
Hopf & Adler. (Fort Worth Star-Telegram, April 22, 1973,
Sec. E, p. 11, Col. 2-3.)
 32

working drawings following the owner's approval of prelimi-

nary architectural design. Geren certainly did not expect

to repeat the process of preparing working drawings at his

own expense each time a revision was made by Kahn's office.6 0

A. T. Seymour, President of Thos. S. Byrne, the firm respon-

sible for the engineering and general contracting of the

Amon Carter Museum of Western Art, was accustomed to receiv-

ing a thoroughly worked out preliminary design before making

a cost estimate. He was also accustomed to obtaining a com-

plete set of architectural working drawings prior to begin-

ning construction. Bowen King, original, former museum

business manager, remembers what effect reprogramming had

on the building of the museum:

As far as I know, we never got a completed set

of plans. Decisions were made with him (Kahn)
out there drawing in the sand...until the last
nail was driven and for a while after that he
was still designing. 6 1

Natural Working Order

Kahn's tendency toward introspection led him to analyze

his own creative process. He found that his own mental and

intuitive activity could be reduced to what he called a

"natural working order."'6 2

According to this formula, the
design of a building was developed in three stages:
induction,

60 Statement by Bowen King, former Business Manager, Kim-

bell Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas, August, 1976.
61 Ibid.
62
Plagens., op., cit. , p. 20.
 33

deduction, and construction. 3

The induction stage was that phase of design in which

Kahn searched for the unmeasurable. The dimensions, materi-

als, and cost of the building were not considered. To begin

a design solution, Kahn used a technique learned from his

teacher Paul Cret at the University of Pennsylvania. This

technique, which originated at the original Ecole des Beaux-

Arts in Paris, called for making an esquisse, or quick sketch,

with only the building program for reference. In Beaux-Arts

training, the student was expected to capture the basic

nature of a building in the esquisse. When a project was

complete, the student's final drawings were always compared

with the esquisse to determine whether the nature of the

esquisse had been violated. 64 Experience with actual design

commissions had given Kahn a method of developing an esquisse

that worked for him.

I use the square to begin my solutions, because

the square is a non-choice really. In the course
of development, I search for forces which would
disprove the square.6 5

In summary, the induction stage consisted of Kahn's search

for the unmeasurable through the development of an esquisse.

63
Louis I. Kahn, "A Statement," Arts and Architecture,
LXXXI (May, 1964), 18.
64 Jordy, op. cit., p. 332.
65
"Louis Kahn in India: An Old Order on a New Scale,"
Architectural Forum, CXXV (July, 1966) , 44.
 34

Until he had produced an esquisse which satisfied him, he

continued reprogramming.

The deduction stages was that phase of design in

which
the idea.of the building was translated into a
particular
design. For the first time it became measurable in terms
of
size, materials, cost, and space use. In Kahn's terminology,
he "gets the water out.''6

The construction stage was that phase of building

devel-
opment in which the particulars of the design
were to be de-
cided. These particulars were the joints between
materials,
the appearance of the millwork, mullions, electrical
equip-
ment and fixtures, and even the treatment of architectural

elements such as non-bearing walls. If a client closely

followed Kahn's description of the construction
phase, he
would realize that this architect had no intention
of com-
pleting his design in great detail before construction
began.
If he had, he would have violated his own principle of
re-
programming.

Served and Servant Spaces

In Kahn's design philosophy, a very important concept

was what the architect called "served and servant
spaces."
These terms were first coined by Kahn to explain
the floor
plan of the Bath House for the Jewish
Community Center,

66
Statement by Marshall D. Meyers, Kimbell Art Museum,
Fort Worth, Texas, February 10, 1975.
 35

Trenton, New Jersey.67 The served spaces are the areas for

which the building exists, while the servant spaces are the

areas housing activities or equipment necessary to support the

served spaces. Kahn's theory of served and servant spaces

called for the grouping, not hiding, of the mechanical equip-

ment in the primary working and living areas of a building.

Because Kahn has emphasized the importance of an honest ex-

pression of mechanical equipment in his architecture, he has

been accused of being "enamored of ducts. "68 But Kahn replied:

I do not like ducts. I do not like pipes. I

hate them really thoroughly, but because I hate
them so thoroughly, I feel they have to be given
their place. If I just hated them and took no
care, I think they would invade the building and
completely destroy it.69

Kahn believed that once the parts of a building were

accurately defined, certain "laws" enabled that building to

design itself. One of these was the law of "order." 7 0 By

order Kahn meant a natural hierarchy of spaces. The served

spaces were at the top of this hierarchy and the servant

spaces at the lowest levels, according to their functions.

In a museum, Kahn listed the served spaces as the galleries,

lecture rooms, classrooms, libraries; and the servant spaces

6 7 Paul
Heyer, Architects on Architecture (New York,
1966), p. 391.
68
Ibid, p. 392.
6 9 Wurman,
op.,cit.
70
Ibid.
 36

as the workshops, laboratories, storage rooms, offices, and

mechanical equipment.7 According to Kahn's theory of

served and servant spaces, even though an office and an air-

conditioning duct were both servant spaces, the air condi-

tioning duct would be lower in the hierarchy than would be

the office. This law determined the grouping of spaces with-

in the building and prevented, for example, locating a

postage desk in a public gallery. Note the similarity be-

tween Kahn's concept of served and servant spaces and Richard

Brown's division of museum activities into Public Level,

Operations Level, and Service Level in the "Pre-Architectural

Program."

The Architecture of Connection

To Kahn, the spaces in a building which serve as con-

nectors are just as important as the rooms they connect. He

called the treatment of such spaces the "Architecture of

Connection."72 The capitalization of the first letters of

the words in the coined phrase is used by Kahn to denote

architecture as a fine art rather than architecture as a

commodity. As he said it, "All buildings do not belong to

Architecture." Kahn believed that for a connecting space

to be worthy of the name "Architecture of Connection," it

7 1 Plagens,
op. cit., p. 19.
72 Wurman, op. cit.
7 Heyer, op. cit., p. 396.
 37

had to be carefully designed so as to provide the observer

with an appropriate experience. Kahn also said that the

"Architecture of Connection" could not be programmed by
the
client, but must be offered by the architect. The quotation
below, in which Kahn presented this concept, can easily
be
read as descriptive of the main lobby of the Kimbell
Art
Museum, although the statement was first published
in 1966.
The place of entrance, the galleries that radiate
from them, the intimate entrances to the spaces
of the institution form an independent Architec-
ture of Connection.7 4

Natural Light
Kahn was dedicated to the utilization of natural light
as the predominant source of illunination in his
last build-
ings. He believed that sunlight was more than desirable;

that, in fact, it was necessary to man's true experience of

his environment.

He (a man) cannot even accept a movie house, you

might say, which must be in darkness, without
sensing that there must be a crack somewhere in
the construction which allows enough natural light
to come it to tell how dark it is. 7 5

In the years preceding the design of the

Kimbell Art Museum,
Kahn did a lot of experimenting with the effect of
the shape
of the interior structure of a building upon the
light that
enters it. His experiments were based on the assumption that

74
Nurman, op. cit.
75
.Marshall D. Meyers, "The Wonder of the
Natural Thing,"
unpublished interview with Louis
I. Kahn, Fort Worth, August 11,
1972. See Appendix D, p. 166.
 38

the glare caused by the contrast between a bright window

and its own wall made a room seem dark. He knew that glare

was reduced and even disappeared if light from a secondary

source was thrown against the window wall. The same prin-

ciple is employed in photography when a flash is used to

illuminate a backlit subject. Rather than using artificial

light to reduce glare, however, Kahn experimented with

bouncing sunlight off an interior wall in order to lighten

the window wall. He used this idea in the Bath House of

the Jewish Community Center in Trenton, New Jersey. Here

he placed cylindrical walls inside open cubicles, creating

entrances for light without using windows, skylights, or

clerestories. Other examples of Kahn's use of structure to

manipulate light may be seen in the Outpatient Clinic for

the National Hospital at Dacca, Bangladesh,and the Institute

of Management at Ahmedabad, India. In the former, large

circular openings in a long masonry wall form a complex

arcade. In the latter, intricate geometric shapes are used

for openings in brick walls and form a screen in front of

the offices. Kahn's own statements concerning this concept

,76
are: "Structure is the giver of light," and "The light

that enters the room should be the light of the room itself." 7 7

In terms of museum design, Kahn's belief in natural light was

reinforced by the knowledge that most paintings are created

76Kahn, "A Statement by Louis Kahn," p.13.

7 7 Jordy, op. cit., p. 320.

 39

in a setting of natural light. He felt strongly that the

artist's intentions could only be fully realized if his

paintings were seen under original light conditions.

Natural Materials

Kahn expressed a belief in the use of natural materials

for the buildings he designed. However, his definition of

"natural" included concrete if it were not painted, and steel

if it were not polished. He felt that natural materials

blend well together and that there exists a sympathy among

them. He liked the natural irregularities inherent in ma-

terials such as stone, wood, and marble. He considered the

irregularities which occur during the pouring and setting of

concrete to be an important part of Concrete's aesthetic

appeal. He always specified that the irregularities occur-

ing in concrete surfaces not be eradicated by sanding and

filling. Kahn was very much opposed to the use of paint on

architectural surfaces because its effect, like that of

artificial light, was static and lifeless. He was also

opposed to polishing stainless steel because "in nature there

78 Polished steel, he felt, was
are no polished materials."

too ostentatious and disturbing to the sense of unity created

by well-blended natural materials.

Kahn also believed that a building should be put to-

7 8 Kahn,
"The Wonder of the Natural Thing, " op. cit. See
Appendix D, p. 160.
79 Ibid, p. 161.
 40

gether in such a way as to reveal its structure to the ob-

server. Turning again to nature for justification, he said,

"How we were made is recorded in us. " 80Not a new idea to

the history of architecture, it was nevertheless Kahn's

criterion for the choice of materials for structural and

non-structural portions of a building. This principle would

be violated, for example, if a concrete pier were covered

with a facing material such as marble, because the pier

would appear to the observer not to be structural.

Concept of Architectural Elements

For Kimbell Art Museum

While traveling in Europe in 1959, Kahn saw a building

that greatly inspired him - the Kraller-Muller Museum by

architect Henri Van de Velde in Otterlo, the Netherlands.

According to Marshall Meyers, the member of Kahn's office

who served as Project Architect for the Kimbell Art Museum,

there were certain architectural elements in this museum that

Kahn wanted to use in the Kimbell Art Museum. The Kr5ller-

Muller is a one-story structure set in a large, tree-filled

park. The Kr5ller-Muller Museum has an inward orientation,

that is, very few exterior windows. Finally, and most impor-

tant to Kahn, a great deal of natural light is let into the

galleries by means of skylights and open courts. The courts

are filled with foliage and running water.8 1

8 0 Wurman,
op. cit.
8 1 Statement
by Meyers, >February 10, 1975.
 41

Striking similarities between the Kimbell Art Museum

and other works of architecture have been noted. For ex-

ample, William Jordy, knowing Kahn to be an admirer of Le

Corbusier, saw an influence in the Villa Sarabhai, in Ab-

e82
medabad, India. Others have pointed out similarities

between the Kimbell Art Museum and the Forum at Pompeii with

its arched bays. Meyers, however, feels that if these in-

fluences existed, they were very general and not intentional,

as was the incorporation of design elements of the Kroller-

Muller.

82 Jordy, op. cit., p. 332.

 CHAPTER II

EVOLUTION OF TilE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

The architectural design of the Kimbell Art Museum

evolved slowly over a period of six years, beginning in 1966

with the signing of the architectural contract and ending in

1972 with the completion of the building. In contrast to

standard architectural practice, the building design was in-

complete at groundbreaking in June, 1969, and continued to

be revised throughout the construction period.

During these years Kahn produced four models and a

wealth ofdrawings in his search for a design which satisfied

him. The purpose of this chapter is to establish and charac-

terize this sequence of design development in four stages:

First Design Presentation, Second Design Presentation, Final

Preliminary Design Presentation, and Design Revision During

Construction. The discussion of these four stages of design

development is primarily derived from the four architectural

models produced by Kahn and owned by the Kimbell Art Museum.

Additional information was provided by architectural drawings

and personal interviews. To discover the relationship be-

tween designs and to make comparisons simpler, each design

composition is discussed in terms of site plan, orientation,

floor plan, and structure. In response to each design pre-

42
 43

sented by the architect, the client submitted a list of

requested revisions. Tracing this sequence of design pre-

sentations and revision requests from the first design pre-

sentation through each design phase to the final revised

design indicates most clearly how the ultimate design evolved.

Architectural Contract

The architectural contract, called the design agreement,

October 5, 1966, formalized the relationship between the

owner, the Kimbell Art Foundation, the architect, Louis I.

Kahn, and the associate, Preston M. Geren and Associates.1

This contract established a sequence of design presentations

which the architects would be expected to produce.

Under Article II, "The Architect's and Associate's

Services," section two, the architect was "to prepare sche-

matic design presentation drawings, including site develop-

ment plan, floor plan, elevations, schematic renderings and

model."2 The term schematic when used in architectural

writing refers to a rough, unmeasured sketch made without

drawing instruments. The purpose of a schematic presentation

is to provide a design for the client either to accept or

reject without entailing the expense of measured drawings.

Upon approval of the schematic design, the architect was

to prepare "preliminary working drawings and outline specifi-

Kimbell Art Foundation and Louis I. Kahn, design agree-

ment, Fort Worth, October 5, 1966. p. 1.
2 Ibid, p. 4.
 44

cations." 3 Preliminary working drawings differ from sche-

matic drawings in that they are measured and drawn to scale

with architectural instruments. Typically they include a

number of cross-sections and details, as well as plans,

elevations, and a model. The purpose of this presentation

is to provide the owner with accurate information about the

building. Once the design has been found to be acceptable,

the preliminary working drawings then are used by the asso-

ciate to prepare working drawings, which are a set of large

scale, detailed drawings to be used by the workmen on the

construction site.

Other services required of the architect include the

"selection of materials, textures, and lighting effects,"4

consultation with the associate, review of the working draw-

ings, and visits to the construction site.

In Article V, a time schedule established the number of

days alloted for the preparation of each design presentation.

The schematic design was to be presented 120 days after the de,

sign agreement was signed; the preliminary design 120 days

after approval by the owner of the schematic presentation;

the working drawings, 180 days after approval of the prelimi-

nary design.5

First Design Presentation

Plan

True to his statement that he began his design solutions

3 Ibid 4 5 Ibid,
Ibid p. 9.
 45

witha square, a "non-choice" shape, Kahn produced a model

that was square in ground plan for his first design pre-

sentation in April of 1967 (See Figure 1, p. 46).6 The

layout of the building on the site was determined largely

by the location of existing trees. 7 Note that the two large

courts are placed so as to contain most of the trees
which
had lined Will Rogers East, the street closed by
the city in
establishing the site (See Figure 2, p. 47).

The museum represented by this model would have been

enormous, approximately six hundred feet on a side and

cov-
ering nearly the entire nine-and-a-half acre site. The
building would have been a one-story structure composed
of
fourteen bays running north-south from Camp Bowie Boulevard

to Lancaster Boulevard. The roof would have been composed

of tilted plates, forming in cross-section a sequence of

truncated pyramids. A close examination of the model reveals

that the roof becomes a portico on all four sides. Project

Architect Marshall Meyers said that even at the time of
the
first design presentation, Kahn was considering using an

arched roof, for he made many supplemental drawings, among

them studies of a series of semi-circular barrel vaults.8

Along the boundaries of the north and south porticoes

6 See p. 33 above.
7 Statement
by Meyers, February 10, 1975.
8 Marshall
D. Meyers, Project Architect, letter to Becky
Connally, Philadelphia, February 1, 1977.
 46

lop,~

'14$
!,-N

i. i m
-

- r

t y4~ -
-

Fig. 1--Site mode for first design presentation

 47

-loom 0 J AW

UN
I

iL

Nz

00

Fig. 2--Model for first design presentation, plan view

 48

Fig. 3--Model for first design presentation, oblique view

 49

Kahn placed an unusual feature, a screen composed of four-

teen semi-circular arches overlapping the edge of the tilted

plate roof. The idea of overlapping two different geometric

shapes is a recurring theme in Kahn's architecture. For

example, he used giant circular screens in the Exeter Li-

brary at Exeter, New Hampshire, and arcades composed of half

and full circles in the Outpatient Clinic of the National

Hospital at Dacca, Bangladesh (See Figure 3, p. 48).

The plans drawn by Kahn to accompany this model show

that the museum would have been visually divided into two

nearly equal parts by an east-west corridor which Kahn called

a "spine." He believed that the spine would serve as a

point of reference for ease of orientation. As the spine

passed between two extremely large courtyards, it formed

what Kahn called a "'connector," the kind of space Kahn re-

ferred to as the "Architecture of Connection."1 0

Included in the first presentation was a set of sche-

matic drawings made with colored pencil on translucent sketch

paper. Kahn intended for these drawings to show how the bay,

a basic architectural unit, could be varied in use for the

Kimbell Art Museum. Thus he showed the closed bay, the open

bay, the bay interrupted by a light court, and the portico,

9 Statement
by Meyers, February 10, 1975.
1 0 Wurman,
op. cit.
 50

consisting of the bay open on all sides."

Structure

The structure intended by Kahn for the museum building

at this stage consisted of a great many columns supporting

the tilted plate roof. The question arises: Why did Kahn

use such a simple structure on his first model and such a

daring, innovative structure on his final design? The

reason given by Marshall Meyers, Project Architect, is that

Kahn himself did not have a sophisticated knowledge of en-

gineering. He would not produce a design requiring a type

of construction he did not know how to build. Later, through

consultation and study, Kahn became familiar with the struc-

tural system that he used in the finished building.12

It is evident in the first model that the concept of

lighting the galleries through a light slit in the roof was

central in Kahn's mind from the beginning. Note that even

the porticoes had skylights. The schematic drawings indi-

cate that Kahn was toying with the idea of using some sort

of fixture to manipulate the light coming through the slit,

although at this stage, he apparently had no shape in mind.

The section he drew for the museum interior simply shows a

rough scribble beneath the opening in the ceiling.13 This

Statement by Meyers, February 10, 1975 . These

sketches, never published, are part of Kahn's estate. Slides
of them are owned by Marshall Meyers.
12
Ibid.13See drawings, p. 59.
 51

model has several of the features which Kahn said he admired

in the Kroller-Muller Museum in Otterlo, the Netherlands.

It is a one-story building in a park setting. It has an in-

ward orientation. A great deal of natural light would have

entered through skylights and courts.

The first presentation was called by Kahn the induction

stage of the design formula. In fact, this first design pro-

vides an excellent example of what Kahn meant by induction

stage. The basic architectural elements that he was to re-

tain in the final design were present. However, the specific

and measurable factors such as size, scale, materials, and

details had not been formulated.

Revisions Requested by the Client

Size.--The Kimbell Board of Trustees and the Director,

Richard Brown, were quite alarmed at the size of the building

on the site model.14 At six hundred feet on a side, the

museum would have covered nearly three hundred sixty thousand

square feet, an area three times the size prescribed by the

"Pre-Architectural Program."

Cost.--Further, it was immediately apparent that if the

high standard of workmanship and materials were used as re-

quired by the program, the enormous size of the proposed

museum would have pushed the cost far beyond the budget.

Scale.--Richard Brown wanted the museum to have a

villa-like rather than a palatial scale. He objected to the

1 4 Statement
by Mleyers, February 10, 1975.
 52

height of the ceiling shown in the drawings to measure

thirty feet at the crown. The "Pre-Architectural Program"

had required that the ceiling be no higher than twelve feet.

Skylights.--Although Brown had ruled out skylights as

an acceptable light source in the "Pre-Architectural Program,"

there were approximately six thousand, six hundred linear

feet of skylights in the first model. Brown's statement

had been unequivocal:

Skylights are not the answer; the visitor cannot

look out them, the changing natural effects do
not come through them effectively; they cause
insufferable design problems; require huge waste-
ful attic and clerestory spaces; and they always 15
leak no matter what is spent on their maintenance.

Clearly the skylights proposed by Kahn for the Kimbell Art

Museum were not the kind described above in the program.

However, with this kind of predisposition against the device,

it was not likely that Brown would immediately embrace this

lighting solution.16

Kahn's concerns in the early design stage of the Kimbell

Art Museum were different from those of his client. Kahn's

interest was in the quality, not the quantity of museum

spaces. He did not want to hear that the building was too

large or too expensive because to him it did not have

15
Ibid

16 Statement by Bowen King. King, who was present at

this meeting, remembers Brown's resistance to the skylights.
In his words, "Brown said there was not way we were going
to have skylights."
 53

7
dimensions or cost; it was "unmeasurable, "

The Second Design Presentation

On November 30, 1967, the second design for the Kimbell

Art Museum was presented to the Board of Trustees, the mu-

seum director, Richard Brown, the museum business manager,

Bowen King, the Associate Architect, Preston Geren, and the

President of Thos. S. Byrne & Co., general contractors,

A. T. Seymour.8 Following the first design presentation,

Kahn had made a number of important design revisions. Below

is a discussion of these developments with respect to plan,

structure, lighting, and materials.

Plan

In explaining his design procedure, Kahn had said, "I

search for forces which would disprove the square. " 19 The

forces which changed the Kimbell square plan into the H-

shaped plan were 1) the client's objection to the overall

size of the building, and 2) the location of trees on the

site. Kahn recomposed the design by removing the three bays

on both the north and south facades of the building which

had served as walls enclosing the two extremely large courts

1 7 See Kahn's design philosophy, p. 22 above.

is8A.T. Seymour,"K.A.M. Early Correspondence, August,
1966-January, 1969." Business File. 20 items. Byrne & Co.,
Inc., Fort Worth, Texas.
19 eSe p. 30 above.
 54

flanking the connector. Now the space which had been con-

tained within the museum in the form of open courts flowed

into the surrounding park grounds. The revised plan, now

in the shape of an H, was called the "dumbell plan" by Kahn's

office staff.20 This new plan was composed of three parts:

1) a rectangular, two-story section which was to house the

permanent collection above and the museum staff offices be-

low; 2) a narrow two-story connector which was to have a

book store above and an open pavillion below; and 3) a

smaller one-story rectangular section which was to house

both an auditorium and a temporary exhibition space.21

The amount of space devoted to light courts was

greatly reduced. In addition to deleting the large open

courts which had flanked the connector, Kahn reduced the

number of small courts, ten of which had been variously ar-

ranged in the remaining museum spaces. In the new plan, the

wing containing the auditorium and temporary exhibition area

was to have no courts, while the wing housing the permanent

collection was to have eight light courts, or "light wells,"

as Kahn called them,22 of varying dimensions, shapes, and

depths.

20
Meyers, Letter to Becky Connally.
21 Plagens, op. cit., p. 20.
22
Statement by Meyers, Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth,
Texas, October 6, 1976.
 55

Fig. 4--Model for second design presentation, plan view

 56

Site Plan
the plan of the
At the same time that Kahn recomposed
by shortening the bays
museum, he reduced the size further

so that the building represented by' the second design pre-

a little over half the site.

sentation model only covered
this stage included only pools
Kahn's landscaping scheme at
shrubs and
and terraces. There is no indication of planted
enormous reflecting
trees. Particularly noticeable is the
of the building. This feature
pool at the southwest corner
a dramatic, asymmetrical
would have given the west entrance
57).
approach (See Figure 5, p.
of site develop-
It is interesting to note what features
The building is entirely
ment are missing from this model.
walks,
isolated. No indication has been made of pedestrial
lots.
driveways, truck delivery entrance, or parking

Structure

scale of the first

Richard Brown's objection to the

changes in the roof design.

presentation led to a number of
on some of the accom-
The ceiling height indicated by Kahn
design presentation had been
panying drawings for the first
Brown wanted the ceiling lower. To comply
twenty-four feet.
of curves which,
with this request, Kahn investigated kinds
enough to
while suitable for a vaulted roof, were shallow

produce a lower ceiling. It was the search for such a curve

23
led to a change in the structural system.
that

2 3 Statement by Meyers, February 10, 1975.

 57

Fig. 5--Model for second design presentation, oblique view

 58

was Marshall Meyers,

Assisting Kahn in this research
a book entitled
Meyers showed Kahn
project architect.
b FrdAnerer24,Tesufc
Building by Fred Angerer. The surface
Surface Structures_in
A barrel
of interest to them were barrel shells.
structures
and
which is posttensioned
shell is a concrete structure
precast. Unlike a vault, which
poured in place, that is, not
as a beam
arches, a shell functions
functions as a series of
The
spanning great distances.
and as such is capable of
shell may be made of several
curved section of a barrel
a sector of a circle, an
shapes, among them a semi-circle,
p. 59).
ellipse, and a cycloid (See Figure 6,
and more. While the shallow
Kahn found what he wanted
ceiling,
effectively lowered the
shape of a cycloid curve
drastically reduced
the barrel shell type of construction
for support. Problems were
the number of columns needed
the cycloid barrel shell
anticipated in trying to substitute
To provide the skylighting, the
into the building design.
at its apex, the point where
shell would have to be pierced

it needed the most strength. To complicate matters further,

between
a low, flat ceiling eight feet wide was to be used

for ducts and wiring, a servant

the shells to provide a place
not
Because a flat ceiling does
space in Kahn's terminology.
span long distances, it
have the structural strength to
25
cycloid shell.
would have to be held up by the

in Building (New York,

24Fred Angerer, Surface Structures
1961).
2 5 Statement by Meyers, October 6, 1976.
 59

An

--- -a a
-

Fig. 6--Model and cross-section of cycloid for second

design presentation.
 60

Unsure of whether the cycloid shell could be engineered

to meet these constraints, Kahn called as a consultant his

friend, August Komendant, a renowned expert on concrete con-

struction. Komendant, who had been the engineer for a number

of Kahn's other buildings, was busy with the construction of

Habitat, the innovative Canadian apartment complex. Upon

receiving Komendant's assurance that he could engineer the

cycloid shell with a few structural changes, Kahn proceeded

to incorporate this dramatic structural form into the design

of the museum (See Figure 7, p. 61).

The decision to use the cycloid shell not only produced

a lower ceiling with minimal support, but additional benefits

which were perhaps more subtle. The cycloid shell supported

by four columns forms an architectural unit or module which

not only allowed, through repetition, the creation of the

museum building, but also serves as a visual explanation of

the building's structure. The portico reveals in its purest

state the principle embodied by the cycloid shell. Thus

Kahn's statement: "A module is not the repetition of a motif,

but the expression of an architectural principle. M6

Kahn foresaw another opportunity inherent in the use of

shell. He could emphasize the fact that it was not supported

along its edges. By placing glass strips between the unsup-

ported edges of the shell and the infill walls below, Kahn

Kahn, Light is the Theme, p. 70.

 61

H
0
0

fill

If
0

C)
0

\\
-

0
r.

0
0r-

0--
Hd

0)
bb
'Hi
//

0d

C)

4-
 62

enhanced the dramatic impact of the architectural principle

depended.
upon which the structure of the building

Lighting

Kahn had
By the time of the second design presentation,
in the Kimbell
well-developed objectives for the use of light

Art Museum. Accordingly, he designed the architectural fea-

objectives.
tures which he believed would materialize his
features.
The following is a discussion of these architectural
coming from the
Light Courts.--Kahn knew that all light
was to be
courts would be reflected light because each court
the sun
of such size and shape in relation to the angle of
could enter
at all times of the day that no direct light rays

the museum. He believed that the courts would create islands

of the
of soft green light as a welcome rest to the eyes

visitor. Kahn planned to add further interest to the design

of the courts by varying the use of solid and glass enclosing

walls
walls, but did not make specific decisions about interior
27
of the museum until the constrution phase.
presen-
Light Reflector-Diffuser.--For the first design
of some
tation, Kahn had given only a scribbled indication
the
kind of device to be hung underneath the light slit in

roof. Before the second presentation was produced, Kahn and

The
Meyers drew several possible shapes for the fixture.
one suggested
study chosen for the actual presentation was

examination of the floor plans of the final pre-

2 7 An

liminary design verifies this point.

 63

by Meyers (See Figure 8, p. 64).28 The two-foot-wide slit

in the roof would have been covered with a type of trans-

parent plastic that screens out ultraviolet rays, the portion

of the light spectrum most harmful to paintings. Beneath the

plastic filter would have been a fixture composed of convex

one-way glass mirrored on its top surface. The observer

would have seen a silvery band which was transparent enough

to allow a glimpse of passing clouds. The light entering

through the slit would have reflected off the surface of the

shell and diffused down the walls. Suspended from the fix-

ture would have been an artificial lighting device equipped

with a photosensitive mechanism to add illumination on cloudy

29,
days and to light the museum for night activities.

Summary

A visitor approaching the museum from the west would

have passed by an extremely large reflecting pool on his

right and a small rectangular one on his left as he entered

a portico stretching the entire width of the building. Once

inside the museum, the visitor would have seen the auditorium

on his left and the temporary exhibition area on his right.

Ahead of him would have been the spine leading to the connec-

tor. Inside the connector on gallery level would have been

a bookstore; on the level below, an open pavillion leading

2 8 Statement by Meyers, February 10, 1975..

29
Plagens, op cit. , p. 23.
 64

Fig. 8--Cross-section studies for light reflector-diffuser

 65

to the sculpture gardens flanking the connector.

Continuing through the connector, the visitor would have

entered the two-story part of the museum. On his own level,
he would have seen the main gallery, the exhibition area for

the permanent collection. Below him would have been the

staff offices, research facilities, laboratories, shipping

dock, storage areas, and mechanical equipment. This arrange-
ment of the floor plan complied with Richard Brown's desire

for a distinct separation of public, service, and operations

activities.

Revisions Requested by the Client

The second design presentation was reviewed by Director

Richard Brown, Associate Architect Preston Geren, Contractor

A. T. Seymour, Business Manager Bowen King, and the Board of

Trustees.30 The proposed building, still larger than the

"Pre-Architectural Program" called for, was met with new

criticisms.

Composition.--The dumbell composition of the new plan

was viewed with apprehension. Especially troublesome was

the connector, which was seen as "being like a street that

led nowhere." 31 In addition, Brown felt that the connector

was too narrow to house an adequate bookstore.

Chauffeured Entrance.--Brown had requested a protected

30
A. T. Seymour,, "K.A.M. Early Correspondence.
st
atement by Meyers, February 10, 1975.
 66

entrance to the building for visiting dignitaries (See

Appendix B). Such a feature had not been provided. The
director was especially concerned about the arrival of
visi-
tors during poor weather conditions. By Meyers' account,
Kahn hated cars and 'Wanted to keep them as far away from his
buildings as possible." Kahn strongly opposed modifying or

"sacrificing his design to accommodate any sort of vehicle.

The solution Kahn favored to what became known as the
"car
problem" was the use of a series of canopies to the garden

entrance on the west side of the museum for special

occa-
sions.32

Truck Entrance.--For security reasons, protected access

to the museum by delivery trucks was a real necessity.

The
kind of facility Brown wanted for this purpose had been
de-
tailed in the "Pre-Architectural Program" (See Appendix B).
However, with porticoes running the entire length of both

the front and back of the proposed building, there seemed to

be no immediate means of incorporating these important fea-

tures into the design.

Reflecting Pool.--The enormous pool, equal to nearly

one-fourth the area of the museum, was a feature which
was
not well accepted by those who reviewed the design.
The
size and shape of this pool was criticized as being unrelated

32
Marshall D. Meyers, Lecture, Kimbell Art Museum,
October 6, 1976.
 67
to the composition of the proposed building.33

All of the objections taken together, the size, the

composition, the connector, the oversize pool, and the car
problem, caused Kahn to go through a major re-evaluation
of
the museum design. This period was a retreat to the induc-

tion stage in which he again asked

himself the question,
"What is the basic in museum design?" Komendant said that
the answer Kahn found was "silence and the quality
of
light."34

The Final Preliminary Design Presentation

By the time Kahn had developed a new design

for another
presentation, a total of two and a half years had lapsed since

the architectural contract was signed. The time allotments

in this contract had clearly not been met.
The Board of
Trustees were preparing to sue the architects
because, dur-
ing the delay, prices of materials and labor
had increased
twelve per cent.35 To avoid suit, the architects and the
contractor, Thos. S. Byrne & Co., agreed to begin construc-
tion with only preliminary drawings and a working model. 3 6

Working drawings would have to be produced a step

ahead of
construction.

3
Statement by Meyers, February 10, 1975.
34
Komendant, op. cit., p. 118.
35 Ibid.
36
Ibid.
 68

Plan
In early 1969, Richard Brown went to Philadelphia to

discuss with Kahn more problems he saw with the floor

plan.
He was dissatisfied with the location of the auditorium
and
the temporary exhibition gallery. The connector and the
car problem still worried him. During this meeting, the
plan was reorganized into a U-shaped composition, essen-
tially the plan of the finished building. 3 7 The new design
was translated into the construction model and final
pre-
liminary drawings, dated June, 1969.

The construction model looks deceptively like the

finished museum (See Figure 9 , p. 6 9). On closer examina-

tion, however, there are a number of differences worth

noting.

Reversal.--The auditorium and the largest court were

in
the south wing of the museum, just the reverse of the final
design (See Figure 10, p, 70).
Size.--The north and south wings- were each composed of
seven cycloids, including the porticoes, as opposed to six
in the completed museum,. The length of the shells represented

would have been one hundred fifty feet rather than

one hun-
dred, making the total length one hundred fifty feet
greater
than the existing museum. 38 The auditorium and the main

37
Meyers, Lecture.
38
Statement by E. B. Brown, Building
Manager, Kimbell
Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas, June 7, 1977.
 69

* 0

C H

b0

0)

2&
70

C
0

'H
Cd
-p

U
0
CH

-H

S
PL
 71

light court were so large that each occupied two shells rather

than one (See section of north elevation, Figure 11, p. 72).

Four light courts rather than two pierced the opposite wing.

Stairs.--Public access to the lower east entrance from

the main lobby was by means of a single stairway on the north

side of the lobby. Where a large double stair is in the

present lobby would hqve been a raised platform of irregular

shape.

Lower Level.--Space use on the lower floor was still un-

committed at the time of groundbreaking. All that was known

was that one wing would house shops, the other offices.1

The preliminary plans of this floor bear no relationship to

the final design, and no basement level was planned at the

time. Had the museum been built by these plans, ductwork

and mechanical equipment would have been buried underground.

Servicing these facilities would have been prohibitive.

Access.--Kahn's solution to the car problem does appear

on the construction model. An east entrance adjacent to

public parking and covered by the second floor was provided

for the unloading of arriving passengers. Still notably

missing from the final model, however, was a security-tight

service entrance for delivery trucks.

Site Plan.--Placing the museum building on the far east

end of the sitesaved more existing trees than had any pre-

vious model. Especially satisfying is the preservation of

statement by King.
 72

0
H

-0
c0

-H

r0

0
H

-H

All
 73

oaks
the spacious meadow and the entire double row of live
was
which had lined Will Rogers Road East, the street that

closed by the city when the site was established.

in
New planting would have been formal, even geometric

layout. A maze-like arrangement of shrubbery was proposed

for the west boundary. Terracing at the west entrance would

have been interrupted by three rectangular pools, two re-

flecting the porticoes and one dominating the central court.

A planned acquisition, the sculpture of L'Air by Aristide

Maillol was represented on the model as the focal point of

the entrance court. The remaining three sides of the museum

were to be enclosed by parking area, no distinction having

been made between public and staff lots.

Summary.--The visitor arriving at the museum by car

could park either on the west or southeast tide of the build-

ing. If he entered the protected east entrance, he would

have access to the gallery floor by a single flight of stairs

on his left. On the other hand, if the visitor chose to

walk to the main west entrance, he would find himself on a

symmetrical terraced forecourt flanked by the portico pools.

Ahead of him would have been the central court with

L'Air by Maillol. Upon entering through the main doors into

the lobby, he would have seen an extremely large light court

on his right in the South Galleries and four small courts on

his left in the North Galleries.

The final preliminary design presentation was in Kahn's

 74

The architect
terminology in the deduction stage of design.

had eliminated such distracting elements as the connector

of the
and the large pool and had revised the composition
40 that is,the
plan. In Kahn's terms, he "got the water out;"
elements.
design had been refined to its essential

Materials

Following standard procedure, Kahn wrote a set of out-

model
line specifications to accompany the final preliminary

and plans. Kahn's use of materials is a basic part of his

architectural philosophy. Several points should be made

about his choice and handling of materials.

Kahn used very few materials in the Kimbell Art Museum.

This fact is more significant than it may seem. The harmony

and serenity, the lack of confusion, the peacefulness, the

wholeness of the museum can be partially attributed to this

limitation. Only four major materials are seen on the ex-

terior: concrete, travertine, glass,and lead; only five on

the interior: concrete, travertine, glass, wood, and steel.

All of the materials specified by Kahn are linked by

common aesthetic characteristics. All are nearly neutral in

hue and in intensity; they share a medium value range, are

matte in finish, and smooth in texture. Concrete, travertine,

wood, and mill-finish stainless steel each have subtle sur-

face variations. Because the material share so many

4 0 Meyers, Lecture,
 75

characteristics, they blend harmoniously with one another to

produce a quiet, yet gracious environment.

Kahn considered the materials he used in the museum

to be natural in spite of the fact that concrete, steel,

and glass are obviously manufactured. His primary concern

was apparently not the source of a material but its treat-

ment. For example, he said that he used mill-finish stain-

less steel because "in nature there are no polished

materials."4 1 By the same rationale, Kahn spoke of concrete

as a natural material because he used it as poured without

sanding or painting.

Kahn believed that a building should be put together in

such a way as to reveal its structure to the observer. One

of the techniques he used to accomplish this goal was to

correlate appropriate materials with discrete architectural

functions. Specifically, in the Kimbell Art Museum, concrete

is used only for structural members; glass and travertine for

enclosure; steel for mechanical equipment and fixtures. The

finished building can be read by the observer in terms of

structural and non-structural elements (See Figure 12, p. 76).

Concrete.--Because the structural nature of the cycloid

barrel shell requires that it be cast in a form, the only

material of which it could be made is concrete. This type

of concrete structure can not be precast and lifted into

4 1 Kahn, "The Wonder of the Natural Thing," See

AppendixD;, p.. 16C,
 76

Fig. 12--South Facade, detail: end of cycloid

 77

position, but must be cast in place.

It should be noted
that cast-in-place concrete is generally
considered to be
inferior to precast concrete in appearance.

Exposed cast-in-place concrete, unless strictly

specified as architectural concrete and
con-
stantly supervised during casting, usually
re-
sults in ordinary concrete, and is definitely
not recomended if first-class surfaces
are
desired.

The difficulty with cast-in-place concrete

is that the opera-
tion of mixing, pouring, and curing
cannot be carefully
controlled because it must be
done out-of-doors. Furthermore,
mistakes and defects cannot easily
be discarded since the
piece is cast as part of the finished
structure. All the
imperfections show. However, it is precisely the quality
of
cast-in-place concrete with all its
roughness that Kahn
wanted for the Kimbell Art Museum.
He believed that it was
the chance variations that occur in
casting that gives con-
crete the character of a natural material.

Where travertine and concrete belong

beautifully
together because concrete must be taken
for what-
ever irregularities or accidents in
the pouring
that reveals itself.43

The aesthetic of form imprinted concrete

was not Kahn's
idea. He had been deeply impressed by the use
of this tech-
nique in the Marsailles Bock, the apartment building in
Marsailles, France, by Charles Edouard
Jeanneret, known as

42
Concrete: Wheredo We go from here? Cast-in-Place
vs Precast," Progressive Architecture,
XLVII (October, 1966)
186. The authority quoted is Raymond Epstein.
43Kahn,
"'The Wonder of the Natural Thing."
See Appen-
dix D, p. 162.
 78

Le Corbusier (1887-1965). This Swiss-born architect had

pioneered the use of unsanded concrete and had exploited the

design texture of wood form. Whereas architects had pre-

viously specified that concrete be sanded and filled to
re-
move evidence of the wood form, Le Corbusier had chosen
to
design forms composed of boards arranged in a pattern that

was emphasized rather than eradicated by the finishing

pro-
cess. This treatment of concrete used by Kahn and Le Cor-

busier contrasted sharply with the smoothly sanded, plastered

and painted surfaces of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in

New York, 1946-59, designed by American architect Frank

Lloyd Wright (1869-1959).

The treatment of the concrete at the Kimbell Art Museum

is Kahn's refinement of Le Corbusier's technique. The effect

Kahn achieved was honest, but it should not be considered

effortless or without manipulation. The architect chose pre-

cisely the features he wanted to appear on the surface
of the
concrete, then proceeded to design the kind of formwork
that
would produce this effect. Because he want a generally

smooth surface, he specified plywood rather than boards for

the form. Because he wanted a crisp, linear motif of rec-

tangles, he had the edges of the plywood sheets beveled to

produce the fins which outline each rectangle. For further

pattern, he made use of the form ties. "Form ties are to be
recessed cone type snap or screw ties regularly spaced,
left
 79

partially filled."4 4 Nor was the color of the concrete a

chance feature. It was selected from a great number of

samples which were mixed and cured on the site. Thus, the

highly articulate effect of the finished concrete surface of

the Kimbell Art Museum was achieved by very careful planning.

Similar, but not identical concrete surfaces were de-

signed by Kahn for Salk Research Institute, Las Jolla, Cali-

fornia; the Exeter Library, Exeter, New Hampshire; and the

Erdman Domitory Complex at Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr,

Pennsylvania.

Travertine.--Travertine from Bagni di Tivoli, Italy,

was specified for the infill areas of the museum; that is,

the non-loadbearing walls which were not to be glass. Kahn

chose this material for its natural irregularities, its

quiet color, and its harmony with concrete. Kahn had pre-

viously used travertine with concrete at the Salk Center at

La Jolla, California.4 5 He had developed a preference for

4 4 Louis
I. Kahn, "Outline Specification for Preliminary
Working Drawings for Kimbell Art Museum," Kimbell Art Founda-
tion, Fort Worth, Texas, December 30, 1968, p. 2.
4 5 In
"The Wonder of the Natural Thing," a recorded in-
terview of Kahn by Marshall Meyers, Kahn explained how his
original decision to combine concrete with travertine was
made. The architect had first specified slate for the Salk
Research Institute because he thought a strong contrast "would
make things brilliant." However, due to unexpected changes
in shipping arrangements, travertine arrived at La Jolla from
Italy at a much cheaper price than slate. After considering
the effect on his design produced by a low contrast combina-
tion of materials, Kahn decided to accept the travertine.
When the Salk Institute was finished, Kahn was quite pleased
with the results. He noted that "as a new building, it al-
ready had the harmony of something that was aged."
 80

subtle combinations of materials during his travels in

Europe, where he had been deeply impressed by the quality

of the architectural ruins. To him, the blending of visu-

ally sympathetic materials gives a building the same sense

of quietness and harmony that centuries of weathering has

bestowed upon ancient architecture.

For the interior of the Kimbell Art Museum, travertine

was specified as a facing material on the stairs and their

enclosing walls as well as on the sections of the floor that

were like to receive heavy traffic. Kahn's reasons for

using travertine on the interior of the museum included

further considerations. As a flooring material, travertine

was non-slippery as well as extremely durable.46 As a wall

surface, it was of just the right value for the lighting

effect the architect was trying to achieve. A darker materi-

al would have reflected too little light for adequate illu-

mination of the galleries; a lighter materials would have

created a background which would have been too bright a sur-

face against which to exhibit paintings.

Lead.--Like Kahn, Richard Brown had seen features in

European architecture with which he felt very sympathetic.

Lead as a roofing material was one of these. Used on the

domes of many churches, it had the virtue of lying smoothly

on a curved surface. The dark, matte finish was another

46
Kahn, "The Wonder of the Natural Thing." r-ee Appen-
dix D, p. 161.
 81

point in its favor, since the extreme glare of Texas sun-

light had to be considered. Kahn, too, was enthusiastic

about the use of lead for the museum roof as he had seen it

in cities on the east coast. His preliminary specifications

called for lead-coated copper, as this was the most frequent-

ly used form of lead for roofing.

4'7

Lead was also specified for.plugging the form tie holes

in the concrete walls. If left unfilled, the tie metal would

tend to rust and streak the concrete surface.

Oak.--Oil-finished, quarter-sawn, clear select white oak

was specified for the cabinet work, millwork, and panelwork.4 8

Oak is the only exposed wood in the museum. Similar in value

to travertine, white oak is also highly durable, low-key, and

beautifully grained. Kahn said that sunlight reflected off

the oak would be honey-colored in contrast to the silver

light from the light reflector-diffuser and the green light

from the courts. 4 9

Steel.--Mill-finish, or unpolished, stainless steel was

to be used for the soffits of the low ceilings in the galler-

ies, for doors, mullions, elevators, for the stair rail, and

for air intake and outlet devices.

5Q Considerably darker and

4 7 Kahn, "Outline Specifications,t " p. 6.

4 8 Ibid, p. 3.

49Veyers, Lecture.
5 ckahn,
"Outline Specifications," p. 3.
 82

steel, the mill-finish surface

duller than polished stainless
Kahn explained:
was chosen for its low-key presence.
not to be polished?
Why do we want stainless steel you don't want
We don't like it polished because
simply
to see yourself in the material.. .and it And,
in itself.
isolates and becomes ostentatious of
unity, the sense
therefore, the sense of its
the walls for
the blending, so that you can read thickness
their
their length and their height and that the
is all gone because there's one (material)
you do not feel the
eye is attracted to5 1more and
unity of materials.
design,
Transparent Materials.--In the final preliminary
of acrylic plas-
the light reflector-diffuser was to be made

tic, mirrored on one side. The roof slits were to be covered

filter to screen out the

with sheets of acrylic containing a

ultraviolet rays of the sun. Glass doors and walls were to

separated by an air
be glazed with two layers of glass
52
space.
water is an im-
Though not a part of the specifications,
facade. Seen over the
portant material on the west entrance
portico pools, the
dark brown marble aggregate that lines the
that of a curving
effect of the water as a design element is
of the roof. Its shimmer-
form which repeats the color value
to the surrounding
ing surface provides a textural contrast
pavement.
area, unlike
Other Materials.--The lower-level office
and
the galleries., was ordinary in both design concept

Thing," op. cit.

5Kahn, "The Wonder of the Natural
See Appendix D, p. 160-61.
5 2 Kahn, "Outline Specifications," p. 4.
 83

materials. This area was to have plaster and lath wall parti-

tions and carpeted floors. Other materials included in the

ceramic tiles in the bath-

preliminary specifications were
paving for the entrance
rooms, granite on the curbs, gravel

walks.53
Kahn for the Kim-
Summary.--All materials specified by
nearly
bell Art Museum were linked by common characteristics:
value range,
neutral in hue and intensity, within a medium

and smooth in texture. There are signifi-

matte in finish,
over large enough areas
cantly few in number and each is used

to create a serene environment. The relationship between

material and architectural function is kept consistent,

allowing the observer to be able to read the building's

structure.

Last Design Revision Before Construction

On June 25, 1969, three days before groundbreaking,

his land-
Kahn sent to Velma Kimbell a letter describing

scaping ideas (See Appendix E ). The sketch accompanying

the
this letter shows the building much as it is today,
hundred feet, the
length of each cycloid shortened to one
north park-
number of cycloids reduced by one each wing, the
and the terracing
ing lot and truck entrance established,
(See Figure 13, p. 84).
planned for the south garden
by new plant-
Shielded from view from bordering streets

53 Ibid, pp. 2, 3, 4.
 84

I
N

Q)

~
0

Q4)
760

Q)
c-i)

c
/
(

2~ 2
r

~ 1 1&

ti
'I
'I CIO
%A C7

0
.rH
PL,

JLV
 85

ing, the public and staff parking lots were to be on sepa-

rate levels. A service entrance for trucks was at last

provided from the lower staff parking area into the north

wing of the museum. Unlike the final scheme, both parking

lots were to be entered from Camp Bowie Boulevard.

The south garden as sketched was a natural grass theatre

bordered by planted terracing. Kahn imagined this space

being used for musical and theatrical performances, and,

when not in use for these purposes, as a sculpture garden.

It was the kind of area he often referred to as an unpro-

grammed space that is, it was flexible and available.

The concept of the west entrance differ'ss from that of

the final design. As Kahn explained in his letter to Velma

Kimbell, there was to be a central court with a fountain

which would serve as the source for the portico pools.

This sketch and dated letter give a clear indication of

the incomplete state of the architectural design at the time

construction began. It was not just a question of there not

being detailed working drawings for the contractor, but of

basic elements on the lower floor plans being in a state of

flux.

Design Revisions During Construction

To make it possible for the design of the Kimbell Art

Museum to be completed while the building was under construc-

tion, certain arrangements had to be made. First, a re-

structuring of contractural relationships had to be

 86

formulated. Second, the contractor, A. T. Seymour had to im-

provise means of beginning construction without completed

plans.

Legal Arrangements

Because the Board of Trustees of the Kimbell Art

Foundation were pressing suit against the architects, the

partnership between Kahn as Architect and Geren as Associate

was, dissolved. New and separate contracts were written to

establish a separate responsibility of each architect to the

54
owner.

The original "Agreement,," the architectural contract,

had provided that Geren be the engineer for the entire pro-

ject. However, with the introduction of the cycloid shell,

it had become apparent that the expertise of August Komendant,

with whom Kahn had consulted on his own, would be required to

complete the project. In fact, Kahn had given Komendant the

impression that he would be the engineer for the museum. To

resolve the misunderstanding that ensued, a new contract was

written on July 29, 1969, after construction began. It pro-

vided that Komendant would engineer the gallery level floor

and the cycloid shell system while Geren would be responsible

for the foundations and the basement floor.5 5 These new

54 Statement by King.

55Komendant, op. cit., pp. 120-22.

 87

contracts lessened the strain on the individuals involved

and made further progress possible.

The construction contract was let on May 4, 1969, to

Thos, S. Byrne, Inc., a firm of engineers and general con-

tractors of excellent reputation. Previous to this date,

a significant amount of preparatory work had been done by

A. T. Seymour, President of Thos. S. Byrne, Inc. On Febru-

ary 7, 1968, Seymour had attended an informal meeting of the

Board of Trustees to participate in a review of the prelimi-

nary design. Present also at this meeting were Richard

Brown and Bowen King. The materials of which the building

was to be made were discussed.56 Following this meeting,

A. T. Seymour investigated the supply and prices of these

materials. He prepared an analysis of the anticipated

shortage of labor and materials caused by the concurrent

construction of the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport. 5 On April 7,

1969, Seymour submitted to the Kimbell Art Foundation a pro-

posal for a guaranteed maximum cost of $6,055,500 with an

estimation. of twenty-one months construction time. 58

Procedures Developed by the Contractor

A. T. Seymour, President of Thos. S. Byrne, Inc., made

56A. T. Seymour, "K.A.M. Early Correspondence."

57 A. T. Seymour, Letter to Kimbell Art Foundation. Offi-

cial estimate of the cost of construction of the Kimbell Art
Musuem, Fort Worth, Texas, April 7, 1969.
58Ibid.
 88

significant contributions to the success of the construction

phase of the Kimbell Art Museum by planning the schedule

of
excavation and construction so as to accomplish the
extra-
ordinary feat at the beginning construction without
final
working drawings. He also was responsible for developing

new construction techniques which made possible the

innova-
tive architectural forms designed by Kahn and engineered
by
Komendant.

During the summer of 1969, the contractor excavated only

that section of the site where the building foundations
were
to be poured. The higher, unexcavated portions of the site
provided access to the roof for both men and machinery. Then
in 1971 the part of the site devoted to parking areas
and
landscaping was excavated.59

Seymour used a similar phased program of purchasing

ma-
terials. Because he had a guaranteed maximum cost
contract,
he was able to buy materials without taking bids,
thus allow-
ing him to phase purchases to correlate with each design
component as drawings were completed.

The development and fabrication of special construction

equipment was an important contribution

of Thos. S. Byrne,
Inc. Project superintendent Virgil Earp and cycloid superin-

tendent L. G. Shaw of the Bryne construction company developed

the unique wood forms that were used for making the cycloid

59
A. T. Seymour, "Contractor Challenged by Kimbell
Art
Museum Design,?" Texas %Contractor, LXII (November 21, 1972)1
23.
 89

barrel shells.6 0 Because the structural nature of the

cycloid shells made it necessary for them to be cast in

place, the wood forms were made in such a way that they

could be jacked down and rolled to another position after

each operation of pouring and setting the concrete shell.

Before constructing a full-length cycloid as an inte-

gral part of the museum, the contractor had his crew build

a twelve-foot-long full scale mock-up of a cycloid shell as

a test for the materials and techniques planned. 6 1

Features of Design

Velma Kimbell turned the first spade of earth on the

site of the Kimbell Art Museum at the groundbreaking cere-

mony held on June 27, 1969.62 The remarkable process by

which the museum came into being is captured in Richard

Brown's statement about how Kahn operated during construc-

tion, "Even as concrete and steel and stone and glass

go up, reprogramming goes on. ."63 and Bowen King's comment:

"Decisions were made with him out there drawing in the

sand. . ."64

The following discussion of the design revisions made

during the construction period covers the plan, the structure,

5 9 Ibid, 60
p. 21. Ibid.
61-
Kimbell Art Foundation, "Projected Architectural Costs
and Time Schedule Based on Suggested Architectural Contract,"
Fort Worth, Texas, August 29, 1969.
6 2 See 6 3 Statement
page 31 above. by King.
 90
. -U

4-j

I I I I I
CU
cc~
1,1 III EH

K -U
, _
H

-D
0
I
0
v-H
0
0
i Li,
-D.

LjJ v-H

P-H

\\=__

-7 1-7

T _
- E1
Q)-

Li,
T -7
71T

E
L_ Tf
7---
TL_ _- _7 I TI - -
-

0
T7
-

-U
 91

the architectural details, the light reflector-diffuser,

the fixtures, the materials and the landscape design.

Plan Gallery Level.--Most of the designing of the

interior floor plan took place during the construction

phase.
At Richard Brown's suggestion, the preliminary plan was
flipped over so that the auditorium and the large
court
occupied the north rather than the south wing.65
The number
of courts in the north, now south wing was reduced
from four
to two, although only one court is visible in the south

gallery since the two-story conservation court

is surrounded
by solid walls at this level. The auditorium and the large
light court each of which had occupied two cycloids
in the
final preliminary design were revised to fill
only one
cycloid bay (See Figure 14,
p. 90).
For the interior of the galleries, Kahn designed move-
able partitions which could be installed by
means of special-
ly designed connector buttons. These partitions could be
fastened either parallel or perpendicular to
the cycloid
shell in a variety of locations. The size and proportions
of the panels were made optional by the use of
modular parts
which could be assembled in the carpentry shop
and covered
with either fabric or wood (See Figure 19).
Kahn said of the
partitioned spaces, "there'll be houses within the house." 66

65
Statement by Richard
F. Brown, Kimbell Art
Museum,
Fort WorthTexas, July 23, 1975.
66
Forth Worth Press, May 4, 1969.
 92

Like the final preliminary design, the final revised

design featured two entrances to the galleries, the main

entrance on the west and the protected drive-up entrance

on the east. However, rather than a single off-center stair

connecting the east door to the gallery level, the new plan

was given symmetry with a dramatic double stairway placed so

that its axis lay exactly beneath the soffit between the two

cycloids of the lobby. Opposite the west entrance was placed

the bookshop area against the background of storage closets

which enclose the library.

The "Pre-Architectural Program" called for the location

of the library in the operations division of the museum,

that is, near the curatorial offices; but space in this area

was simply not available.6 7 The library was therefore placed

in the east central cycloid. The library plan underwent

careful scrutiny by librarian Ilse Rothrock, who was hired

early by Richard Brown so that she could assist the architects

in the design of the floor plan and the selection of library

furnishings. Kahn's original plan for the library was symme-

trical with a central door leading to a reading area flanked

by stacks and offices on both sides.

The mezzanine would have been split into two sections

each accessible by iron spiral stairs. Ilse Rothrock opposed

this scheme because a split mezzanine would have made it

6 7 Statement
by Ilse Rothrock, Librarian, Kimbell Art
Museum, Fort Worth, May 14, 1975. All the material pre-
sented about the library was learned during this interview.
 93

difficult to locate books while the spiral stair would have

made the mezzanine inaccessible to elderly visiting scholars.

Furthermore, carrying heavy books up the iron stairs for

shelving would have been difficult.

The librarian recommended instead a continuous mezza-

nine accessible by a centrally located stair which is aug-

mented by a booklift. Further suggestions included the

allocation of space to a slide room, the location of glass

doors and walls for surveillance, and the specifications of

furnishings, built-ins and shelving. These recommendations

were accepted by Kahn and used in the final design.

If the museum were empty there would be no way to know

that the cycloid adjacent to the auditorium was a cafe. A

good example of one of Kahn's unprogrammed spaces, it could

be readily made into an exhibition area. For catered activ-

ities, the kitchen, at the far north end, is well located

next to the service elevator which originates from the truck

entry dock to the floor below.

Plan, Operations Level.--The interior spaces on the

operations level were not allocated to specific functions

when construction began. All that was known, according to

business manager Bowen King, was that the shops would be in

one wing and the offices in another. However, once it was

established that the truck entry and loading dock were to be

in the north wing, it was inevitable that such activities

as shipping and receiving, security, the preparations labora-

 m 94

1771

C)
I
0

U0

C)

U
0)

~1 0
U\\
U

E
U I

0
0

a)

EL 0
0

U U
-
"

771L
"

0.
ITI
9 11
1 1
LL
p
m
 95

tory, and the carpentry shop would be clustered as they are

around the dock area (See Figure 15, p. 94).

The remaining non-public activities to be on the opera-

tions level were related to the curatorial, educational, and

administrative functions of the museum. The facilities for
these activities were allocated to the south wing.
This
area was conceived as a central core of offices ringed
by a
perimeter of offices and laboratories. The laboratory facil-
ities for conservation and photography were conveniently

placed near the storage vault. The allotment of only one

cycloid to storage reflects a general policy established
by
the director that the Kimbell Art Museum would not
indulge
in the practice of accepting large bequests of mediocre
art
in order to attain one or two fine pieces of a quality
suit-
able for display in the galleries. 6 8 Therefore, minimal
vault storage was needed as most of the art owned by
the
museum would be on exhibit in the galleries.

Suitably located adjacent to the storage vault is the

conservation laboratory for which Kahn designed a two-story

light well to provide natural light for the examination

and
in-painting of works of art. The lobby at the east entrance
functions variously as a gallery, a security checkpoint, in-
formation area, and entrance to the main stairs. Behind the
stairs and beneath the library and bookstore is a mechanical

plant.

68
Shepard, op. cit., p. 27.
 96

Plan, Service Level.--At the time construction began,

there was to be no basement; mechanical equipment would

be buried. However, these plans were changed at the

suggestions of E. B. Brown, who was hired as building man-

ager of the Kimbell Art Museum during the planning phase

so that the museum could benefit from his experience in

a similar position at the Amon Carter Museum of Western

Art.69 E. B. Brown recommended that the excavation pro-

vide enough space for a true basement with standing room

in most areas. The significance of this change for the

museum as a whole was that spaces otherwise alloted to

mechanical equipment were freed on the gallery and opera-

tions level for other uses more appropriate to their

location. 7 0

Structure, Gallery Level.--Because new contracts had

been written before construction began, August Komendant was

legally responsible for the engineering design of the cycloid

system and the gallery floor while Preston Geren was to work

out the structure of the operations and basement levels.

Komendant's revision of Kahn's design of the cycloid shell

system amounted to structural corrections, not engineering

design. Kahn had produced a preliminary design which con-

tained all of the basic elements of the cycloid shell system.

69 Statement by E. B. Brown.
70 Ibid.
 97

Komendant's contributions were primarily the posttension-

ing of the shells and adjusting of dimensions of the shells

and soffits and the structural calculations for the gallery

and mezzanine floors.

Komendant produced drawings which specified the size

and placement of the steel posttensioning tendons in the

concrete shell cycloid roof. Slack tendons were to be

placed in the hollow formwork before pouring the concrete.

When the concrete was dry, the tendons could be tightened to

counteract certain stresses that the shell could not with-

stand without them. 71

To provide the required structural integrity, Komendant

varied the crossection of the curved beam under each end of

the cycloid. Because the thickness of the curved beam varies,

its lower edge no longer forms a perfect cycloid curve. How-

ever, the top edge of the travertine wall under this curved

beam was by Kahn's design a perfect cycloid curve. There-

fore, the lunette-shaped gap formed between the wall and the

curved beam varies in width. This lunette, filled with glass,

varies from nine inches to four inches.7 This engineering

revision by Komendant produced an important design detail, a

feature of subtle elegance.

The concrete slabs forming the floors of the mezzanine

and galleries were designed by Kahn and engineered by

71
Komendant, op. cit., pp. 122-23. Illustrates section
of shell.
72 Ibid, p. 122.
 98

Komendant to have a totally new type of construction: styrofoam

blocks imbedded in the slab to displace 724.5 tons of con-

crete. Kahn's purpose was aesthetic. He wanted to see a

smooth, unbroken ceiling from the floor below.7 To Kahn

this smooth ceiling was an important design feature which

would contribute to the serenity of the museum.

Ordinarily, if an architect wanted a smooth ceiling he

would specify a waffle slab 7 4 from which would be suspended

a smooth, non-structural ceiling such as acoustical tile.

Kahn, feeling that this type of construction is dishonestde-

signed a ceiling that might be called a hidden waffle slab.

It was smooth on the top and bottom with large styrofoam

blocks imbedded within it. Thus, it was not a dishonest

structure, but it was contrived (See Figure 16, p. 99).

There were several advantages, other than aesthetic, to

the use of styrofoam blocks in the concrete floor's slab. A
lighter-weight floor relieved the areas below it of many

columns. Thus, there was increased floor space, less visual

clutter, and reduced cost in both the library and the entire

operations level. Furthermore, the styrofoam served as a

baffle for sound transmission between floors.

'73Statement by Meyers,
February 10, 1975,
74
Definition of waffle slab: a concrete slab supported
by a crisscrossing grid of interconnected concrete grids.
99

0
0
4-H

a)
.HE

N
N
C

C4H
0

U~)

Q0
Hf

U
 100

Structure, OperationsLevel.--Kahn did not design for

the operations level an exciting structural system equiva-

lent to that of the gallery level. Instead, he specified

a rather ordinary type of construction similar to that

found in the average office building. Note in the back-

ground of Figure 17, p.101, the flat ceiling from which

are suspended fluorescent lighting fixtures. The two-story

conservation court is the one inspired space in this area.

Architectural Details.--The term detail when used in a

discussion of architecture refers to the treatment of the

meeting of two different materials or two different surfaces.

If designed well, the treatment of the joint can be visually

quite pleasing. Thus, Kahn's statements:

The joint is the beginning of ornament

It's [a building) like a human body--like your

hand. The way the knuckles and joints come
together makes each hand interesting and beau-
tiful. In a building these details should not
be put in a mitten and hidden. You should make
the most of them.

Considered by some architects to be the most significant

feature of the museum, the architectural details designed by

Kahn have several common characteristics.

First, the number of joints was intentionally minimized

by the use of very few materials and the continuation of

materials over large areas. By this means, Kahn produced a

serene and uncluttered effect.

7 5McLaughlin, op. cit., p. 19.

 101

Fig. I7--Conservation Laboratory, detail: light court

 102

Second, the treatment of the joints was consistent

throughout the interior and exterior of the building. For

example, wood never visually contacts another material. A

deep groove, called a reveal, occurs between each wood sur-

face and the adjacent material. Because the reveal is very

deep and narrow, it is dark enough to conceal the actual

meeting of materials. Specifically, travertine meets con-

crete with a V-groove which is incised, the exact reverse of

the raised V-groove which was intentionally created on the

surface of the concrete by the design of the formwork. Con-

sistent also is the treatment of glass, which never touches

any material but mill-finish steel.

Third, there are no visible hinges, bolts, nails, therm-

ostats, fire hydrants, or other such items which customarily

add visual clutter to the interior of buildings. Some of

the metal hardware was custom designed by Kahn for the Kim-

bell Art Museum, the finest example being the stair rail of

the double stair in the lobby

.

Fourth, the craftsmanship employed in the fabricating

of the details is superb. Reveals are consistently the same

width; parallel edges are always truly parallel; corners are

always perfectly square. Richard Brown explained that much

of the designing of the details took place on the site.

But time after time., on his visits to the site,

Lou found solutions to seemingly insurmountable
design and technical problems by talking to the
men who must physically make the building out of
intractable materials with their own hands. In
 103

these confrontations the master architect under-

stood the problems from the physical workman's
point of view and was willing to alter 7 the way
to achieve his goal ("reprogramming").

Light Reflector-Diffuser.--The final preliminary pre-

sentation had featured studies of a light reflector which

was concave acrylic, mirrored on one side. During the years

1969-72, the design of this important fixture was revised

considerably and refined through many stages of trial and

error (See Figure 8, p. 64),

Lighting consultant Richard Kelly was called upon to

assist in determining the correct shape of the reflecting

device. He reommended that perforated aluminum be used and

that the shape be changed. Kelly drew an intuitive curve

which was refined with the aid of a computer. Twelve dif-

ferent trial reflectors were made by the Kimbell staff and

hoisted into position under the light slit.

The objective sought in the making of the trial reflec-

tors was to find the shape, angle, and position of the holes

drilled into the aluminum which would most effectively dif-

fuse the light entering the museum at all times of the day

and year. The problem was that at some times of the day a

few escaped sunrays would pierce straight through the reflec-

tor and create bright spots of light on the walls or floor

of the museum. Testing was continued until the escaped light

7 6 Richard F. Brown, "Statement: Louis I. Kahn," See

Appendix C; p. 154.
 104

Fig. 18, LErance Lobby, detail: light reflector-diffuser

 105

rays were almost entirely eliminated. 7 7 The actual light

slit in the cycloid shell which had been fitted with glass

in the preliminary design was covered by a transparent acrylic

plastic dome in the final design (See Figure 18,

p. 104).
It is interesting to think of the light reflector-

diffuser as the culmination of Kahn's experiments with light

(See Kahn's design philosophy, p. 36). His approach to the

problem of glare had been to light a backlit wall by re-

flecting onto it incoming light rays which had been bounced

off of an interior architectural feature, usually a wall.

In the Kimbell Art Museum building the cycloid vault is
a
backlit surface, because the light slit lets in direct sun-

light as does a window. What the light reflector-diffuser

does is create a series of tiny surfaces which deflect light

rays so that they enter the building quietly. It is composed

of two closely spaced sheets of aluminum with tiny offsetting

holes.78 Most of the light coming through the inside holes

has been deflected at least once. Light rays which do not

enter the holes are reflected by the curved surface
of the
cycloid. This intricate fixture is therefore based on the same
theory of manipulating sunlight as the buildings discussed

in chapter one, i.e., the only light entering the galleries

is reflected light from one or more intervening surfaces.

77
Occasionally these escaped
light rays may still be
seen.
78
Statement by Richard F. Brown, December 18, 1975.
 106

Materials.--The materials specified by Kahn for the

preliminary design were not changed with the exception

of
one: the type of lead to be used in the roof.
The specifi-
cations had called for lead-coated copper,
but several
problems were found in this material. An examination of such
roofs in the Fort Worth area proved that this
climate pro-
duced a white patina on the surface rather
than the pewter
gray common in cities on the east coast.
For this reason a
calcium lead alloy was substituted for pure lead.7 9

Landscape and Site Development.--The final

design of the
gardens and terracing was essentially the
plan drawn by Kahn
and sent to Velma Kimbell in his letter of
June, 1969 (See
Appendix E, p. 170). The most noticeable design revision is

to be seen at the west entrance, where the

central fountain
was replaced with a tree-filled entry court
lined with marble
chips. The site development was also revised in
terms of
circulation and access. Both public and staff automobile
entrances were shifted from Camp Bowie Boulevard
to Arch Adams.
A comparison of the last model, p. 69, with the aerial photo
of the finished building, p. 107, shows how stairs and walks

were redesigned.

The amount of design production during

the construction
period was extensive, but it did not involve a change in the

79,
"Lead Covers Roof with Eye Appeal," Building
Construction Magazine, LXVII (July, Design
&

1972),2l,'The lead was

supplied by the Murdock Lead Company of Dallas.
Richard Brown, this company obtains lead According to
from old car batter-
ies which they buy and melt down. (Sheppard, op. cit., p. 28)
 107

Wig 18 -- Aerial view of completed museum

 108

basic concept of the museum. The new designing consisted

of 1.) structural corrections, 2) refinements, and 3) de-
sign development of the operations
and basement levels.

Conclusion

The design evolution of the Kimbell

Art Museum can be
characterized as having progress
from 1) a rather loosely
strung together array of architectural
elements to a tight,
focused well-integrated design; 2)
large to small in both
scale and overall size; and 3) having
features designed by
Kahn to having many of the features
requested in the "Pre-
Architectural Program" by Richard
Brown.
The reasons for these directions
in design development
can be attributed to Kahn's method
of working and the unusual
amount of client input. Characteristic 1, above, is Kahn's
general method of finding a design
solution. Using his
design formula, he began his projects
with a loose "unmeasur-
able" first scheme and gradually "got the water
out"80 in the
final, tight, finished design. The other two characteristics,
2 and 3 above, can be attributed to
the unusually active role
which Richard Brown, as client representative,
played in the
design development process. Brown's "Pre-Architectural Pro-
gram" was just the beginning. Throughout the design and con-
struction period, he worked with Kahn
on the plans, often
bringing in his own drawings.

80
Meyers, Lecture.
 109

Finally, the design development of the

Kimbell Art
Museum is characterized by
Kahn's relentless search for
perfection. He was obsessed with architectural
details to
the point of working with
the craftsmen himself.
He was
obsessed with the "unmeasurable"
or spiritual quality of
the museum to the point
that he made design revisions
throughout the construction
period as the building told
him
"what it wants to become." 8 1

81
"Kahn's Museum:
An Interview with
Art in America, LX (September-October, Richard F. Brown,"
1972)
 CHAPTER III

CONCLUSION

A Comparison of the Pre-Design

Concepts
To the Finished Museum

The purpose of this chapter

is to determine whether the
original concepts of the
founder, the director, and
the
architect were realized in
the final design. To accomplish
this purpose, a comparison
is made of the pre-design
concepts
to the finished building,
and an accounting is made
of those
ideas which were abandoned.

The Founder's Concept

Kay Kimbell's concept of the
institution that was to
bear his name is not recorded
as a visual image, but as
an
ideal of excellence. The art collector may have
had a pri-
vate notion of the building
in the style of classical
archi-
tecture as has been suggested.'
But, whether or not he
envisioned a museum of an historical
style, what he wanted
most was a building that would
be considered beautiful by
those who are authorities in
such matters. He wanted his
name to be associated with an
institution that is admired
by
individuals with discriminating
taste. If he had felt qual-
ified to provide a visual description
of such a building, he

Interviewee wishes to remain

anonymous.

110
 111

most certainly would have done

so.2
The Board of Trustees, composed
of those individuals
who knew Kimbell best,
may be considered reliable
represen-
tatives of his wishes.
The members of the board,
at first
alarmed by the unusual
design of the building, 3
were ready
at one point to fire the
architect and the director.4
For-
tunately, Richard Brown
convinced the board members
that if
they would see the project
to completion, they would
be
satisfied. Even during construction,
he recalled, the re-
action was dismay. When the museum was completed
and the
opening ceremonies held,
both public criticism
and board
pessimism subsided.5 The
building was celebrated
as a
beautiful architectural
experience. Kay Kimbell's reactions
could scarcely have been
other than jubilant to
this kind
of response to his museum.
He would have also undoubtedly
received great gratification
from the awards which have
been
bestowed upon the Kimbell
Art Museum building.

The Director's Concept

The general qualities of
the museum certainly fulfilled
Brown's expectations
In fact, some of the statements
in the

2
Statement by Frances Robb,

3Statement by Richard
F. Brown, July 23, 1975,
4 Ibid.

5 Ibid.
 112
program could be used as a description
of the finished
building. For example, the visitor
experiences "warmth,
mellowness, even elegance"
upon entering the museum.
There
is an "honesty between visible
form and method of construc-
tion" and a "clarity of layout"
on the gallery level.6
While Brown wanted a building
that is significant as
a work of architecture, he
did not want the museum to
over-
whelm the art. Some feel that it does. Whether the building
seems to dominate the art
or not depends upon the interests
and background of the observer,
In any case, Brown is by
no
means dissatisfied on this
point.
Richard Brown believed that
the Kimbell Art Museum
building should have an organic
integrity. Certainly, on
the gallery level, it does.
However, the museum as a
whole
must be considered. Although certain architectural
features
such as the woodwork, cabinetwork,
glazing, and metal fixtures
are treated uniformly throughout
the building, a considerable
sacrifice of the quality
of non-public spaces was
made. Thus,
in contrast to the galleries,
the areas used for service
and
operational activities are
quite ordinary in terms of
type of
construction, use of materials,
lighting, and spatial quality.
For this reason, it would
be incorrect to say that
the
museum as a whole has a totally
integrated design.

ApichardF. Brown, "Pre-Architectural Program."

Appendix B, p. 132-33. See
 113

Concept of the Plan

In the "Policy Statement"
Brown established preserva-
tion as a top priority
for museum operations.
Architectural Program" In the "Pre-
he set forth requirements
for the
architectural features
which he felt were
necessary to
achieve this priority.

First, Brown wanted one public

entrance. He got two.
Why? Two other factors had
to be considered:
the site has
only one pleasing vista,
the west; and the program called
for a protected, drive-up entrance. These two facts worked
together to create
a very difficult design problem. Be-
cause the only pleasing
vista is toward the
west, the only
suitable orientation
for the museum is west.
Bringing cars
to this side of the
museum in order to create
a drive-up
entrance would mean
compromising the one
good vista. The
only apparent solution
was to make a second
public entrance,
Unfortunately, because
of its greater accessibility
by car,
the east entrance is
used most, and for
this reason functions
as the real main entrance.
Thus, the Kimbell Art
Museum has
two main entrances
- the real main entrance
and the intended
main entrance.

To compound this problem

the east entrance had
to be one
floor lower than the
west entrance because
the site slopes.
The result? The public
areas of the museum
are now on two
levels, a violation
of one of the main
precepts of the "Pre-
Architectural Program"
that every space which
will ever be
 114
used by the public should be kept
on one level. Further-
more, Brown's three basic
divisions of the museum -
service,
public, and operations - which
were to have the "clearest
possible spatial separation, "7
are now intermingled.
By contrast, the layout of the galleries is
very much
in accord with the concepts set
forth in the program. The
gallery spaces are "flexible." 8
Movable panels may be ar-
ranged in such a way as to allow
each piece to be seen in its
own selected environment, yet
in sequence with other works of
art. Although the ceilings do not have
"a maximum height of
twelve feet, "9 there is definitely
a human scale throughout
the building. While the cycloids reach twenty-two
feet at
the crown, the soffits between them serve as
lower ceilings.

Concept of Lighting
Brown's emphatic demand that
there be no skylights was
ignored by Kahn, who continued
to experiment until he arrived
at a unique skylight/fixture
combination. This device, the
light reflector-diffuser, satisfied
Brown's criteria for
lighting the museum: that natural light should play the
major role in illuminating the
galleries; that the visitor
should be able to glimpse momentary
changes in weather, sea-
sons, and time of day; that glare
should be avoided; and that
the wall space should not be depleted.
One requirement was
not satisfied, however. Brown had asked that only the "side-

7 8
Ibid, See Appendix B, p. 136. Ibid, See Appendix B, p. 132.
Ilbid, See Appendix B, p. 140.
 115
directed parallel rays of
daylight" be brought into
the
galleries.10 The reflector-diffuser
does diffuse light such
that the overhead light in
the galleries could not be
called side-directed, but the
light brought into the museum
through the courts is reflected
at an angle by the courtyard
walls.

Richard Brown is very proud

of the lighting in the Kim-
bell Art Museum and always ready
with statistics about the
effectiveness of Kahn's system.
For example, Brown has
evidence that the Kimbell
galleries have the lowest
light
level of any museum in the
country, yet many people ask
whether the illumination is
too bright for the good of
the
paintings. Why would a dark museum seem
light? It is Kahn's
solution to the problem of
glare. By eliminating the backlit
wall, the architect created
the illusion of ample light.

The Architect's Concept

The question of whether Louis
Kahn realized his design
concepts - the unmeasurable,
served and servant spaces,
the
architecture of connection,
the use of natural light
and
natural materials, the architectural
features of the Kroller-
Muller Museum - can be justifiably
asked of the museum as a
whole, but is most fairly
asked of the public spaces.
Basically, the quality of
the service and operational
spaces had to be sacrificed
during the design period in
order

10
Ibid, See Appendix B, p. 145.
 116
to meet financial and program
needs of the client. It
seems unfair not to recognize
the architectural triumph of
the galleries by basing an analysis
on the whole museum.
Therefore, the following assessment
of Kahn's realization
of his design concepts is based
on the galleries, the west
entrance, and the development
of the site.

Plan Concept
Kahn's intention to use the
architectural elements
which pleased him in the Kr~ller-Muller
Museum was realized
with one exception. He had successfully incorporated
into
the Kimbell design skylights,
long bays, an inward orienta-
tion, and light courts filled
with water and foliage. How-
ever, the idea of a one-story
structure which was present
in the first design was abandoned.
For the second presen-
tation, Kahn made one wing of
the museum model two-story,
probably in an attempt to make
the building look smaller to
satisfy the client.

It is interesting to analyze the

consequences of this
change. If the museum had been built
as a one-story struc-
ture composed of repeated bays
as in Kahn's first presenta-
tion, there would not be the
tremendous difference in the
quality of the public and operations
areas. There would
have been no reason for the mixing
of public, service, and
operations activities that exists
in the present building.
Finally, skylighting could have
served the whole museum, not
just the galleries. However, even at the present size
of
 117
120,000 square feet, a one-story structure composed of
cycloid vaults would have most certainly
been too expensive.
On this point, Marshall Meyers noted
that the finished mu-
seum gives the appearance from the
west entrance of being a
one-story structure. 11

The Architecture of Connection

Several excellent examples of Kahn's

concept of the
architecture of connection can be
seen in the Kimbell Art
Museum. On the interior, the west lobby is
itself a dynamic
connecting space which links the north
gallery, the south
gallery, and the entrance portico.
Within the lobby is con-
tained another kind of connecting
space, the double stairs.
Ascending these stairs is one of the
great architectural
experiences of the building. One moves from a tomb-like
enclosure into the vast light-filled
spaces of the galleries.
It is the porticoes, however, which
are the most impor-
tant connecting spaces of the building.
In addition to the
function of the porticoes as a visual
explanation of the
museum's structure and their potential
as an unprogrammed
space, the porticoes form the perfect
transition between the
building and the terraces. Composed of equal parts open
space and architectural module, the
porticoes accomplish the
most important function of a connecting
space - they prepare

11
Yukio Futagawa and Marshall D.
Global Architecture, vol. 38 Meyers, Louis I. Kahn
(Tokyo, 1976).
 118

the visitor visually and intellectually for

the connected
area.

Natural Light
The one area of design in which Kahn's concepts
totally
prevailed was the lighting of the galleries.
Brown's anxie-
ties about the use of skylights were diminished
with the
successful design of the reflector-diffuser.
In fact, Brown
himself became quite involved in working
out the details of
this device. Thus, Kahn's original concept of using
a com-
bination of light courts and skylights
to illuminate the
galleries was realized.

Served and Servant Spaces

Kahn always gave a great deal of attention

to the hous-
ing of such necessities as electrical
wiring, air-condition-
ing ducts, pipes, and vents. The servant spaces he created
for this equipment in the Kimbell galleries, the served
spaces, camouflages them so well that few people
realize
what they are seeing. It is important to note that these
servant spaces are not hidden from view,
but are planned so
carefully that they are design elements.
For example, the
steel soffit between each pair of cycloids
contains three
ducts which carry conditioned air and
electric wires. Be-
tween the ducts are slits through which the air enters the
galleries. From a design point of view, this apparatus

creates horizontal bands running the

length of each cycloid.
119

i-H

rH

4c)

0O
 120

dramatize the
These bands become perspective lines which

length of the span. Another carefully designed servant

forms a narrow slit be-

space is the air intake grid which
wall at the
tween the parquet wood floor and the travertine

end of each cycloid. Note that this feature is not inter-

but forms a continuous

rupted or stopped short of the wall,

horizontal reveal under the travertine wall. Not only was

Kahn
this servant space made unobtrusive, but it was used by
treatment of
to separate dissimilar rna.terials, his preferred

joints (See Figure 19, p. 119).

Although visibly evident, the provision of servant

philosophy of mini-
spaces was consistent with Kahn's design

mal materials, surfaces and joints. This achievement is

extraordinary. The stringent requirements for air handling

upon
in an art museum have been fulfilled without intruding
with
the clarity of the structural system, yet are consistent

Kahn's architectural philosophy, the servant spaces are

readily visible and honestly expressed.

the
The most beautiful servant space in the galleries is

storage wall behind the bookstore. Having the appearance of

it actually stores the books, cards, and slides

oak paneling,
to the
which are sold in the shop and it conceals the door

library. Architectural features such as these are largely

in the
responsible for the sense of serenity Kahn achieved

Kimbell galleries. Consider the same space interrupted by

occasional protrusions and indentions, occasional changes

 121

20 -- Ent rance Lobby., detail: storage wall behind

books ;>.
 122

of material or color. The continuity of form would be

violated, and violated too would be the sense of the un-

measurable (See Figure 20, p. 121).

The Unmeasurable

Kahn defined the unmeasurable as the essential nature

of a work of architecture. In an art museum, Kahn believed

that the essential nature was "silence and the quality of

light."12 By 1968, Kahn felt that he knew what architec-

tural features were necessary to achieve this silence and

quality of light.

Kahn created silence in two ways: the blending of

harmonious design elements and the elimination of interrup-

tions. The quality of light he exploited for its color,

for its momentary variations, and for the rest it gives to

the eye.

The blending of harmonious design elements was achieved

through the use of materials which were similar in hue, in-

tensity, value, finish, and subtlety of surface variations.

Blending was also accomplished by making servant spaces into

design elements which harmonized with surrounding forms.

Another design element which contributes to the serenity

of the galleries is the simplicity of the floor plan. Easily

grasping the nearly symmetrical layout, the visitor remains

composed and is not distracted by the confusion of not

12 Komendant, op. cit., p. 118.

 123

knowing where he is.

As important as the above elements are, they alone

of the
would not suffice to define the essential nature

museum. The essential nature was stated as a bold, clean,

form, the cycloid shell. Did Kahn

uplifting architectural
unmeasur-
feel that the cycloid shell gave to the museum the

able quality he had searched for? The answer to this

question comes from Richard Brown.

Brown remembers Kahn's tenseness upon arrival in Fort

Worth to see the cycloids for the first time. The architect

After
said nothing during dinner and the drive to the site.

walking around in the partially finished building for some

3
"It works." 1
time, he finally broke into a smile and said,

The cycloid shells are of paramount importance in

This
creating the unmeasurable in the Kimbell Art Museum.

soaring, yet human scale form, reaching toward sunlight at

its apex communicates both serenity and aspiration, both

peace and celebration. It is the spiritual and the archi-

tectural essence of the Kimbell Art Museum.

1 3 Statement by Richard F. Brown, December 18, 1975.

 124

APPENDIX A

STATE OF TEXAS 0
0 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
COUNTY OF TARRANT 0

That I, KAY KIMBELL, of Fort Worth, Tarrant County,

Texas, do hereby make, publish and declare this to be my

Last Will and Testament," hereby expressly revoking all

other Will and Codicils by me at any time heretofore

made:

ARTICLE ONE

General
A. I have no children, nor have I ever had any. I
have provided amply for all of my relatives.
I, therefore,
feel entirely free to attempt to achieve a long-felt
ambition
--to encourage art in Fort Worth and Texas by providing

paintings and other meritorious works of art for public

dis-
play, study, and observation in suitable surroundings. The
intent of this Will, after providing for my beloved wife,

VELMA KIMBELL, is to further such purpose. My wife, Velma

Kimbell, shares such ambition; and it is my hope and my re-
quest that if she survives me as indicated herein,
she make
the necessary elections to authorize the dispositions
of
community property hereinafter detailed.
B. If my wife, Velma Kimbell, survives me and makes
 125

the necessary election, the term "my estate" as herein,

shall be construed to consist of my separate properties and

the entire community estate of my wife, Velma Kimbell, and

me; if my said wife does not survive me or, having survived
me, does not make the necessary election, "my estate" as
used herein, shall consist of all properties and property

interests owned by me at my death. In the event my wife

and I die in a common disaster or under the trust, the affir-

mative vote of a majority of the executors or trustees cast

at a meeting at which two-thirds (2/3) of the executors or

trustees are present, shall be required. Each executor or

trustee shall have one vote on each and every matter. None
of the executors or trustees herein designated by name shall

be required to give bond or other security, but any other

successor trustee may be required by the remaining trustees

to give such bond as may be determined by such trustees. I

expressly direct that no action be had with respect to my

estate in the. appropriate Probate Court other than

to prove,
probate, and record this will and to file an inventory and

appraisement and a list of claims due to or by my estate; it

is my intention that the administration of my estate shall

be independent. All net income received by my estate during

administration shall be paid to, or permanently set aside

for "The Foundation," to be used exclusively for its educa-

tional and charitable purposes.

B. Powers of Executors. I give and grant to my Inde-

 126

dependent Executor full power and authority to administer

upon my Estate and to carry out all of the instructions

herein contained, and during the administration of my estate

to conserve and protect the properties and values thereof.

Without in anywise limiting the generality of the fore-

going grant of power and authority, I expressly empower my

Executors--

1. To sell or dispose of, for cash or on credit,

exchange, partition with co-owners, liquidate and con-

vert any and all properties of my estate;

2. To borrow money (from the Fort Worth National

Bank or otherwise) and to secure the repayment of the

same by pledge, mortgage or otherwise, or to renew any

indebtedness due to or by my estate,

(Signed) Kay Kimbell

 127

APPENDIX B
 THE KIMBELL ART MUSEUM

P POLICY STATEMENT 128

1. General Aims.

A. Purpose.

The Kimbell Art Museum is dedicated to the education, increased

enjoyment and cultural enrichment of the public through the display and
interpretation of works of art. Our knowledge and understanding of the
heritage of civilization is largely dependent upon the continued survival
of the kinds of art objects contained in this museum.

It follows that the paramount duty of the Kimbel I Art Museum is to

display and interpret to present generations and preserve for future gener-
ations, the highest aspirations of past generations as represented in the
works of art entrusted to its care.

B. Scope.

The Museum aims to form collections of the highest possible aesthetic

quality, derived from any and all periods in~man's history, and in any medium
or style. The entire province of art is considered appropriate as the source of
material for the collections.

C. Program.

Consistent with the educational, interpretive and recreational purposes

of the Kimbell Art Museum, the constant display and interpretation of its
permanent art collection, plus programs of changing exhibitions, scholarly
lectures and symposia, conferences of visiting scholars, continuing research
in art, publications, and the encouragement of the general public's under-
standing and interest in art shall be undertaken. The Museum, through its
staff, shall participate in all activities considered to be in furtherance of
the encouragement of art.

11. Acquisitions.

A. Principles of Acquisitions.

The dominating principle involved in the acquisition process is that the

stature of the Museum depends more upon the quality of the definitive objects
it contains than on the historical completeness of its collections. A prospective
addition to the collections, therefore, is to be judged from the standpoint of
aesthetic quality and typicality, and whether it defines a master, period,
school, style or area. The goal shall be definitive excellence, not historical
range or size of collection.
 B. Staff Function.
129

(1) Since the primary function of the Museum

is the acquisition, preservation,
display and interpretation of art at
the highest level of aesthetic quality,
the principal efforts and time of the professional
staff are to be applied
toward this end. No matter how qualified the
staff, the Museum is not
effectively working toward its goals if this is not the case.

(2) The specialized training, experience, knowledge,

research activities
and travel of the professional staff is focussed mainly on two
corollary
aspects of the Museum problem: a. an alert and
up-to-date knowledge
of the history of art and of the art market; b. an
unceasing and intimate
survey of the Museum's own collections
to determine needs versus strengths.

(3) When recommending objects for acquisition, the staff members

rely, not
only upon their own research, but upon the advice,
opinion and aid of the
best available authorities in the specialized field concerned
with the object.

C. Acquisition Procedure.

(1) Based on their findings, the staff, through the Director, recommends
purchases
to the Acquisitions Committee of the Board of Trustees for its approval.

(2) Since successful negotiation for the best in art often requires commitment
and on-the-spot decisions that preclude time-consuming referral
back to
committees, the Trustees, upon special occasion (such as auctions),
and
after approved outline request from the Director, provides individual
staff
members from time to time with authority to spend acquisition funds
up to
sqecified limits, depending upon the occasion.

(3) There is no way of predicting when the most desirable objects will
be dis-
covered or made available. The most successful collecting is always
to a
large degree opportunistic. It follows that the Museum can have a success-
ful acquisitions program only if there is a considerable capital fund
available
for this purpose. The maintenance of such a fund is an essential concomitant
of this policy statement.

(4) In the absence of emergencies, the Acquisition Committee will not approve
specific acquisitions until...

a. There is furnished to it such documentation as may be available

relating to the artist, the origin of the object of art, the reasons
for its value; and an evaluation by the staff, including available
prodf of authenticity;

b. There is presented to it by the Director or his staff, the reasons

for the acquisition recommendation by the staff, including why
the object is definitive of the period, master, school, style or
 area it will define, why obects of art already owned by 130
the Museum do not provide such definition and why,
considering the acquisition budget, the specificobject
is superior to other possible or probable acquisitions.

In the event of on-the-spot acquisitions, the foregoing

documentation
and supporting reasons shall be furnished and presented
to the Acquisition
Committee by the Director or the staff at the first meeting
of the Committee
following the acquisition.

D. Gifts, Bequests, Loans and Advice.

(1) The acceptance of gifts or bequests of objects is governed by the

some
high standards as those outlined for acquisition by purchase.

(2) Gifts and bequests are accepted only if the Museum is left completely
free, by acceptance, from any guarantees in perpetuity concerning
the
attribution, display, exchange or sale of such donations.

(3) The staff shall supply individual consultations and advice to

members of
the public, only in situations where it is ascertained and agreed that
such
action will result in specific benefits to the Museum. For example,
the
staff may advise concerning the acquisition of a work of art by
an indivi-
dual who represents that he plans to present the object to the Museum
at
an agreed time and in an agreed way, but the staff shall not assist
in the
building of a collection merely in hopes that the collection, or
a part of
it, will be willed or given to the Museum. The staff shall not
make pro-
fessional monetary appraisals of works of art in any case.

(4) Long term loans (those not included in temporary special exhibitions)
may
be entertained, but with comparable standards to those which apply
to
donations and purchases.

IlI. Facilities for Implementation.

A. The Museum building is a work of art itself, and it is designed, constructed

and
maintained according to those same concepts of high aesthetic
standards that
govern the collections which it houses. It is a creative contribution
to the
evolving history of the art of architecture, as well as being a functional
instrument for the care, study and exhibition of the other arts.

B. Since our knowledge.and understanding of the heritage of civilization

is largely
dependent upon the continued survival of the kinds of art object
collected by this
Museum, it follows that the paramount duty of the Museum
is to preserve for
future generations what has been entrusted to its care. Every other aspect of the
Museum's program pays obeisance to and, where necessary, gives way to this trust.
A continuing security and conservation program, and the funds, space, facilities,
staff and technical equipment to maintain it are provided.
 131
C. The Museum maintains a reference library. It is primarily a staff library so
that the total program of the Museum may be carried out with economy and
efficiency. It is not a lending library,.-and it is not for the general public's
use, although qualified scholars, teachers, curators and students are welcome
to use it at the discretion of the librarian and the director. The constant growth
and increased efficiency of the library is a major concern of the Museum.

D. In addition to the public galleries, the conservation facilities and the library,
the following facilities are provided and maintained to implement the museum's
total program: a special exhibition gallery, an auditorium, bookshop, adminis-
trative and curatorial offices, Trustees' board room and office, adequate storage
facilities, maintenance and preparatorial shops, study areas, photographic studio,
automobile parking space for visitors, and adequate dining and catering facilities
for special occasions.

E. Since a limited special exhibition program for public benefit, which entails
borrowing by the Kimbell Art Museum, is a part of the museum's function, it is
recognized that reciprocity in lending to other institutions is a necessity. Loans
are stringently controlled, however, in view of the primary policy (I. C.) which
states that the constant display of the permanent art collection takes precedence
over other aspects of public program.
 June 1, 1966

132
KIMBELL ART MUSEUM

PRE-ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM

1. General Philosophy and approach to the building problem:

A. The Policy Statement, attached, sets forth the purposes, goals, scope, program and
generaTmethod of operations for the museum. It should be referred th constantly, and
it should provide determining criteria for constructing the physical facility, as well as
for future management.

B. The building will exist to: 1. preserve and exhibit objects called works of art; and
2. enable as many people as possible to experience those objects as effectively and
as pleasantly as possible: the "confrontation of object and observer".

C. Even though, hopefully, the building will be a creative contribution to the history of
the art of architecture, the building itself should play a supporting role to the reasons
for its existence (B., above), not a dominating role. Architectural "gymnastics" for
their own sake work against these reasons. As in verbal expression, when an alterna-
tive is presented between the use of a long complicated word and short simple one,
the latter is invariably the better choice. The overwhelming percentage of people
whom this building is intended to serve will not be art historians, other architects, or
progressive artists with a sophisticated background in architectural form. Their total
experience of a visit to the museum should be one of warmth, mellowness and even
elegance. Among other experiences educational and personally enriching, a visitor
to an art museum ought to be charmed; otherwise, why should we expect him to come?
The spaces, forms and textures shoudmaintain a harmonious simplicity and human pro-
portion between the visitor and the building and the art objects observed.

That the above moy be accused of "catering" to "popular" taste (or lack of it) is nothing
to the point. In the past this catering was achieved by making the museum a monumentaly
nwesomre repository of "priceless" art housed in "period" settings against a background of
msstve and/or complicated, irrelevant decor. The answer to this ulrnate alienation
bhiween art object and human being lies in the acceptance of the principle that, in a
museum today, the art object is not a decorative pcrt of a given setting (even if it was
when przsduced centures agol). Each individual art object is now a whole world unto
;tself, and archite ctwual conditions sheu!d be so disposed as to encourage the visitor's
complete abcorption in contemplation o' -hat world. Spaces, forms, textures, colors
should avoid distracting that attention. As much as possible, the architecture should
be flexible enough so that, upon installation (and future changes of installations), the
objects of ari may themselves help create the architecture and prescribe spatial quantity
and surface qual ities.

The creative strength o' such a building lies in simplicity and directness of approach to
the uses of the building, clarity of the disposition of parts, honesty in the relationship
 Pre-Architectural Program June 1, 1966 Page 2.0
133

between visible foim and means of construction, taste in the proportions of those forms,
quality of materials, and exquisite craftsmanship in putting the materials together. Such
a building is not only strong in design, it has the desirable effect of strength upon the
average visitor. And, the desired elegance and charm are achieved with restraint and
grace. If, in addition, the average visitor can easily find his way through well lit spaces
in which, because of clarity of layout, he feels that he is making the choices about where
to go to see what, then the message we believe to liefatent in art will be imparted more
effectively to more people sooner. (Even symmetry has the virtue, at least, of making
it easier for people to figure out where they are and how to get to something else, thereby
cutting down museum fatigue.)

No matter how effectively the expressive content of objects in the collection is conveyed
to the public, the art museum today must be for more than a treasure house. The facilities,
space and equipment for the care and interpretation of the treasures constitute a complex
organism involved ina multitude of activities. The specialized facilities for these suppor-
tive activities must be included and equipped for their particular demands with as much
consideration and care as the space for an artistic masterpiece.

A building with such an organic integrity cannot be built in stages, with allowances an'd
adjustments being made for future wings, extensions or added floor levels. The form of
the building should be so complete in its beauty that additions would spoil that form; and
all of the requisite functional facilities should be articulated as components of that form
so that, from the outset, the museum will be able to operate as a complete and vital
institution.

II. Environment:

A. City of Fort Worth:

1. Population: city 400,000; metropolitan area 600,000; projected 1970 for city,
approximately 500,000. Proximity of Dallas (less than 30 miles), plus urban
area between two cities, must be considered in audience potential; i.e., an
additional 1,000,000 population.

2. Cultural Institutions:

a. General: public schools (87 elementary, 20 junior high, 12 senior high);

one large private university in vicinity (T.C.U.) with art programs; four
colleges; Arlington State College at Arlington (15 miles east of Fort Worth
on road to Dallas), new, growing rapidly, will soon have over 10,000 students,
with emphasis on humanities and important art history program, including library,
research, etc.; three municipal junior colleges, all with art programs, now
building.

b. In immediate vicinity of site: Carter Museum of Western Art (annual attendance

 4 lit.I tj %wo %I*

134
over 100,000). Children's Museum (annual attendance approximately
350,000).
Fort Worth Art Center (annual attendance about 50,000).

c. Theaters in immediate vicinity of site: Scott Theater

(legit. stage, etc.), approx.
500 seats. Children's museum (lecture hall), 300 seats.
Casa Manaana (theater in
round), 1,800 seats. Will Rogers Auditorium, 3,000
seats. Will Rogers Coliseum 1
over 9,000 seats.

d. 'Climate:

1. Average annual rainfall, 31.51 inches.

2. Annual average temperature 65.80. Effects of typical mid-continent

climate
produces extremes of weather conditions, often in sudden change
to extremes.
Lower temperature never too extreme or lasting; N. B.: higher
temperatures
are a definite problem to cope with architecturally six months
of year, often
over 90?, sometimes over 1000.

3. High winds frequent, sometimes carrying considerable earth dust content

(factor to consider in: fenestration, water pools, fountains, climate
control
filter systems, etc.).

4. N.B.: Sunlight intensity frequently very extreme. This is a major factor

to
cope with, not only because of heat production, but in relation to visual
effect on exterior design, psychological effect looking out from building
interior, difficulties of potentially high surface reflectance of natural light
off art obiecks, glare effect when looking at art against natural light
source,
intensiy of light upon art objects in which light causes fading.

Ill. Site:

A. See topographical detailed map of area, attached to this program. (designated site in red.)

1. Size, approx. 9 1/2 acres.- (413,820 sq. ft.)

2. Dimensions of sides (approx.): North, 800 ft.; East, 900 ft.; South, 650 ft.; West, 455

3. Contour line interval 10 ft.

4. North-south roadway running through center of site being eliminated.

B. Geographically, the site is ideal. It lies at the heart of the population area defined in
11. A. 1. above. It lies about one mile west of the central downtown business
district; and
immediately to the west of the site the major suburban residential area begins, from which
the highest density of audience potential will be drawn. The site lies directly between two
 Pre-Architectural Program June 1, 1966 Page 4.
135
of the major traffic arteries connecting downtown and the residential area (Camp Bowie
Blvd. on the north, Lancaster Blvd. on the south). Access will be almost entirely by
automobile.

C. The park, of which the site occupies the east end, slopes gently downward from west to
east (approx. 50 ft. drop total). It is covered with rich gross turf and hardwood
trees,
the largest being about 50 ft. tall. The trees, for the most part, parallel in straight
lines the existing roadways. The only existing building in the park proper is the Carter
Museum of Western Art, indicated on the map in the apex of the triangle at the west end
The open spaces, with some trees, and the large edifices of Will Rogers Coliseum and
Theater lie across Lancaster Blvd. to the south; rather ordinary apartment structures
(2 to 4 stories) begin across the street bounding the east end of the site; decidedly
unattractive (1 and 2 story) small business and shop buildings lie across Camp Bowie
Blvd. on the north. This surround, combined with the low-lying nature of the site,
poses a design problem; there is no outward vista, and the elements of lowness and
flatness will have to be utilized for positive effect. Inward orientation and an imagina-
tive garden treatment in relation to terraces and/or building platform will be important.

D. Height restriction: the drop-off in grade from the main floor and terrace level of the
Carter Museum of Western Art to the grade at center of the Kimbell Art Museum site is
about 40 ft. In accepting the park land from the city, the Kimbell Trustees agreed to
adhere to a height restriction of 40 feet so as to avoid impeding the view from the Carter
Museum. This may mean that the first level of the KAM will have to go partially below
grade (parking space, service areas). Roof treatment will have to be carefully considered
in this regard as well.

E. Parking: nearly all visitors will reach the museum by private car (some in taxis or buses).
The park should be preserved as much as possible, and the garden setting for the museum
should be an important part of the museum visitor's enjoyable experience, with sculpture
in the garden. A parking area capable of accommodating about 100 cars should handle
the daily routine attendance; (two passengers per car, averaging two hour visits, over a
7 hour day, 350 open days in the year, with total attendance around 200,000). A parking
area filling this need can be placed partially below grade, under the building itself and
terrace and/or building platform. Overflow parking (scheduled properly) for large special
events can go to vst parking areas for the coliseum across Lancaster Blvd. to the south.

F. Footing: loose gravel in soft clay, resting upon a limestone stratum 20 to 40 feet below
grade. No unusual drainage problems.

,V. General Requirements of the Building:

A. The permanent collection may very well number something under 100 objects (1. paintings,
2. sculpture, 3. drawings and watercolors, 4. objects of the so-called minor arts) when
the museum opens to the public. However, since the prime function of management (se'.
Policy Statement) will be the continued acquisition of objects of the highest possible
re-Mii.. iie rut rrogrom J upe I , I yoo Poge 5.

136
aesthetic quality, the collection will continue to grow
steadily. The rate of growih,
barring certain fores!eeble possibilities of the sudden acquisition
of a whole group or
collection, will probably be at the rate of a dozen or so objects a year.
In any case
a basic design problem, therefore, is to build for a new, small,
choice collection, but
an expanding one. All the space cannot be filled at first, but
the unused portion should
aot yawn openly -t vitors.

B. Ailendance for a few months ufter the museum opcns will probably be much
higher than
that to be expected after the novelty of a new institution and its
attendant fanfare :lies
down. Routine attendance, based upon the current audience potential and
local statjtirs
of record will probably be about 200,000 annually, whi:h means roughly an average
of
upwards of 100 persons in the museum at a time, withi week-day mornings,
of course, bcin3
much lower and Sunday afternoons or holidays infinitely hhJier. The range 'nan run
frzk
next to zero attendance at 10 A.M. Monday morning, ;o 1,000 or more at 3 P.M. Sun
During the period shortly after the -useum opens thss figures will be doubled at lecst.
Based upon burgeoning interest ir. art in the nation, the projected population growth
in
the Fort Worth-Dallas area, and th2 accelerating effect the KAM, its collection, out-
;tandin2 shows and genero! proqrcri will hvwo upon stimuotin; an ad- ronscorJs public,
annual attendance in less than five yeur will probably be c'-er 500,000, and in Icss tha;
a decade it will reach nearly 1,W0,000. (Over 200,000,000 Dersons visited mrruseums ;n
1he U.S.A. lost year.)

C. There are three basic divisions inio which any art museum is lc!icalIly disposed because
of the different nature of ictivsties, personnel, eciipm;n- 'rd type of space required
within each division:

1I Service division (shipping and receiving, mechanical, mointerwice, storage, pre-

paratorial, etc.): all those activities, behind the scenes, that make the physical
operation of the institution possible.

2. Public division (pennanent collection display, special exhibitions, lectures, films,

music, social events, etc.): all those activities that the institution produces for
public benefit and in which the public participates or attends.

3. Operations division (administration, office work, files, financial control, scholarly

research, etc.): a those activities, behind the scenes, which manage the physical
plant and the total public, program.

The clearest p sible sotial separation betwLAeen these divisions or areas, and the most
carefully integrated relationship or unity of parts within each division, is the most con-
Jucive to economy and -fficiency of operation, safety, maximum security and enjoyment
by the public. LFor example, a whole host of headaches involving everything from fire
exits to public circulation to guard salary costs are avoided if every space thutwILevef
by use d b te en .pubic con be kept to one level-the level of easkist access and
pleasantest prospects. Besides which, this simplifies and clarifies the visitor's task of
finding his way, thereby increasing his enjoyment and the chances that he will "get the
message" intended by the art and the institution.
Pre-Architectural Program June 1, 1966 Page 6.
137

Forfthe sake of organization in this program, these divisions have been placed on
separate levels, or floors, of the hypothetical building. This is not a mandate but a
way of ordering the complex problem. Actual architectural design may produce a
better solution.

V. Service Level Cost per

Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Cost
A. Parking area under bldg. and/or constructed terrace,
garden or bldg. platform:
1. 100 cars @350 sq. ft. per car; Incl. access aisles
7.00 24 5 ,000
and inter-spaces................................. 35,000
a. Entry and exit portals for vehicles must be
equipped with mechanized gates, doors or
overhead doors so that area may be closed for
complete security.............. . .......... mech'l.
b. Lintel minimum height must be 13'6" for trucks
(cf. I.C.C. Regs.)
2. Vehicle unloading magazine, along one edge of park
ing space, for deposit of visitors from taxi, buses, or
private cars which will then immediately exit; (cf.
openings, receptions, large social events, etc.)
(During large special event: parking will be attendant
parking, with overflow across Lancaster Blvd. in the
Coliseum parking area.). .................. 2,000 7.00 14,000
3.. Congregating or waiting area for visitors, at foot of
stairs and entrance to elevator to main public level.. 300 7.00 2,100
4. Stairway to main level (well to continue to operations
level)................................... 200 11.00 2,200
(plus
built-in)
5. Elevator to main level (continue to operations level).. 100 9.00 900
(plus
mech'l.)

B. Aisle adjacent to parking area, for truck deliveries and

pick-up (opposite side of bldg. from passenger-visitor
arrival area).. '................... 3,000 7.00 21,000
C. Delivery and loading dock, along one side of area
(opposite visitors entrance from this area) .............. 1,000 9.00 9,000
1. Long, narrow dock could be used as access "corridor"
connecting a number of the facilities itemized
immediately below.
F e- nrcnmiecturat rrograom June 1, 1966
Page 7.
138
Cost pe
r
Sc . Ft. Sq. Ft. Cost
D. Office for: control center, check-point, surveillance
of this entire level during day (glass wall), receiving
visitors during hours when museum is closed, station
center for night guard-........- . -............ 200 14.00 2,800
E. Receiving area for deliveries (mail, packages,
large
objects, whole exhibitions).....................
500 9.00 4,500
1. Overhead mechanized door, min. 10 ft. width-....--
mech'I.
F. Shipping office: uncrating, inspection, wrapping,
packing, etc ............. - -- - -- - .. . . .. 500 9.00 4,500
G. Temporary storage (quick accessable) ....--.-........ 500 9.00 4,500
H. Permanent storage (bulk objects: sculpture, furniture,
etc.) clear space, plus bins............... .. -.....
2,000 9.00 18,000
1. Permanent storage (paintings); screen room...--. ..
1,000 10.00 10,000
(plus
mech'l.)
J. Crate, box and packing material storage...........
500 9.00 4,500
K. Raw material storage (lumber, glass, wall-board, piping,
etc.) for constn. of special exhibitions, cases,
pedestals, etc...... .. .. ... .. -- -- --. .. .. .. 500 9.00 4,500
L. Mechanical shop.............-----------......
1,200 10.00 12,000
(plus
mech'l.)
M. Paint shop ..
300 9.00 2,700
(plus
mech'I.)
N. Preparation area (assembly of shows, their supports,
cases,
pedestals, art objects, frames, etc.)..----0----......**
1,200 10.00 12,000
0. Permanent storage area: pedesfals, bases, build-ups,
vitrines, frames, wall brackets, etc.
1,200 9.00 10,800
P. Photographic studio, work-room and darkroom.
900 14.00 12,600
Q. Storage for half-tone and color plates, plus files ...
150 9.00 1,350
(plus
built-ins)
R. Head Maintenance office .- --.........
200 14.00
2,800
S. Office space for other service personnel..............
200 14.00 2,800
T. Service staff locker room, relief room, wash-room,
toilet. 750 14.00
U. Janitorial facilities (equip. storage, water,
10,500
etc.) ....... 150 10.00
LL -W i 1,500
 139
Cost per
Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Cost

V. Small passenger elevator space (to all levels) 50 9.00 450

p1 us
mech'i.)
W. Freight elevator space (to all levels) ................ 200 9.00 1,800
X. Stairwell (to all levels)...... .. .... ... ... .... @
*g 200 11.00 2,200
Y. Building mechanical equipment (possibly in a sub-
basement):
1. heating-air-conditioning
2. electrial equipment
3. transformer vault
4. generator plant
5. fan room
6. telephone relay panels
7. pump room
8. utility stairs (freight elevator to this area?). 2,500 10.00 25,000

Gross Square Footage.............. ..... . . ... . . 56,500 8.00, $446,000

minus parking area............... . ....... 35,000 7.00 grossi
.
Net Allocatable Space 21,500 9.35 201,000,
(approx. (net)
av. cost.

-
1st. level)_

Cost pert
Sq. F41.Sq. Ft. Cost
VI. Public Level

I A. Entry foyer......................... ............ 1,500 60.00 90,000

(Ideally, peace be to city code engineers and fire
marshalls, an art museum should have but one public
point of ingress and egress: security controI)
B. Book shop and sales ............... ............. 1,000 14.00 14,000
1. Should be walk-in, browsable, self-service to (plus
increase sales maximum. built-ins)
2. Elongated sales desk to prevent congestion of
purchasers.
3. Tight entry-exit way for control of shoplifting.

C. Book Shop stock storage & packaging area.............. 250 11.00 2,750
(plus
built-ins)
0. Sales Office....................... ...... ,200 14.00 I
2,800
Pre-Architectural Program June 1, 1966 Page 9.
140
Cost per~
Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Cost
E. Check-desk space (checking counter, info. desk,
security center when museum open to public)............ 200 14.00 2,80
F. Total gallery area for permanent collection............. 40,000 40.00 1,600,00
-1. Ceiling height: 12 ft.
2. Layout so that objects are apprehended visually by:
a. being placed in a controlled field of vision.
b. seen in sequence. (This does not mean histori-
cally chronological or stylisticbut simply one
at a time against the controlled field.)

.G. Area for temporary special loan exhibitions............. 7,200 30.00 216,000
I. Twelve ft. ceiling.
2. Extended elongated shape, divisible transversely to
create spaces to fit varying show sizes.
3. A number of access points along one longitudinal
side, to permit entry according to particular sized
space for diff. shows, with some space closed off.
4. North longitudinal side glazed, with sliding opaque
paneYs, to adjust to shows of different media (Large
sculpture show could have all glass wall; chinese
painting show must have minimum light).
5. Sales storage area, to service roll-away sales
counter, and to store counter when not in use....... 200 11.00 2,200

H. Auditorium area, incl,seating area, foyer, small stage,

musical instrument storage room offstage, backstage access
to stage, fire exit areas ........... 6,000 30.00 180,000

-1. 300 seating capacity. (plus

2. Continental seating. mechl.)
3. Foyer area providing light and sound lock from
everything outside auditorium.
4. Acoustics for music.

I. Projection room (perhaps part of 3rd level)............. 250 11.00 2,750

1. Equipped for 16 and 35 mm. movie film projection, (PIlS
double slide projection in 2"x 2" and 3 1/4"x4", mechI.)
T.V. camera pick-up for cable or beamed program
to local T.V. tower, complete voice communication
and signal communication between projection room
and stage.
J. Two respite areas/smoking rooms/lounges, strategically
placed in relation to gallery areas to help relieve museum
fatigue each approx. 250 sq. ft.).................... 500 30.00 15,000
 141
Cost per
Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Cost
-0 M.J -.- --i
i - L

-
K. Reception hall, for refreshment serving at special
exhib. openings, receptions, social functions, civic
functions, entertainment of special groups such as
foreign groups, Int'l Council, Assoc. of Directors,
etc.; social gatherings after lectures........i....... .. 0 800 30.00 24,000
1. Strategic placing in rel. to auditorium and special11
exhibition galleries important.
2. Use by any future members or. "friends" of KAM.
L. Catering service area for reception hall................ 600 11.00 6,600
(plus

/
mech'l.)
M. Toilet facilities:
1. Ladies powder room (150 sq. ft.), and toilet
(150 sq. ft.) near entry and permanent galleries..... 300 14.00 4,200
2. Men's toilet rel. to entry and perm. galleries....... 200 14.00 2,800
3. Ladies powder room (150 sq. ft.), and toilet
(150 sq. ft.) rel. to auditorium and special exhit.
galleries... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 14.00 4,200
.
4. Men's toilet rel. to aud. and spec. exhib. -area..... 200 14.00 2,800
N. Janitorial service closets (water & equip.):
1. Two rel. to perm. gall. area (100 sq. ft. each)..... 200 11.00 2,200
2. One rel. to spec. exhib. area....... 0.0....a.t.. 100 11.00 1,100
.

3.. One rel. to entry area... 0............ 0..... ...... 100 1 .00 1,100
4. One rel. to auditorium are.................... 100 11.00 1,100
0. Main level continuation of:
1. Stairwells (V. A. 4 and V. X.).................. 400 11.00 4,400
2. Passenger elevators (V. A. 5 and V. V............. 150 9.00 1,350
3. Freight elevator (V. VW .)................... .. 200 9.00 1,800
.

60,950 $36.00 2,185,950

approx.
average
cost per
____ sq.*ft.
10

I
"i. t:
 Pre-Architectural Program June 1, 1966 Page I I.
142
Cost per
Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Cost

VII. Operations Level

A. Continuation of:
1. Stairwells space from V. & VI .................. 400 11.00 4,400
2. Passenger elevators space .. ........... 150 9.00 1,350
3. Freight elevators space ......... 200 9.00 1,800
B. Reception area (receiving professional and official
visitors, telephone switchboard, work desk for one
person). ...................................... 300 14.00 4,200

C. Clerical pool, central files, gen'l office work area...... 800 14.00 11,200
D. Board room....... .................. 400 20.00 8,000

E. Trustees' office.. ........................ 200 20.00 4,000

F. Administrative secretarial area (3 desks, plus files, to
service director, Asst. director, Trustees) ............. 500 16.00 8,000
G. Director's office................. 400 20.00 8,000
S1. Small screen room for paintings
2. One wall for installation and lengthy study of objects
3. Vault
H. Assistant director's office ............................. 300 16.00 4,800

1. Office for Head of Museum Programs .................. 300 16.00 4,800

J. Business Manager's office .......... ........ 300 16.00 4,800
K. Secretarial area for H., I., J. ..... ... . ..... 500. 14.00 7,000
L. Office for Head of Research.. ................. 300 16.00 4,800
M. Curatoral research office area (divisible into small units),
for future curators; visiting scholars, specialists working
on KAM publications or projects, etc.) ............... 2,000 15.00 30,000
N. Registrar's office and key file on accessions, loans, etc .. 400 15.00 6,000
0. Bookkeeping, accounting, payroll, personnel files, etc.
(proximity to Business Mgr's. office desirable)........... 500 14.00 7,000
P. Library:
1. Stack and reading area ................... 3,000 14.00 42,000
2. Work room................................... 400 14.00 5,600
3. Librarian's office (with window wall fr survelliance
..... ...... 300 of reading
14.00 4,200 area) .... . . .

7
r re-nrcnirecrurai rrogram Junv,. 1 1,1 OO Page 12.
143
Cost per
Sq Ft. Sq. Ft. Cost

Q. Conservation studio
1. Open studio work area (for easels, work tables,
hot vacuum table, etc.); N.B.: must face north,
with entire wall glazed; it is impossible to get
enough light in this room III)................. 500 14.00 7,000
2. Sinks and wet-drain counter area 200 14.00 2,800
3.0 Volatiles storage vault..................... .. 100 14.00 1,400
4. Darkroom for ultra-violet, infra-red, X-Ray, etc.
examination.. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 300 14.00 4,200

.
5. Varnishing and drying room ... .. 0.o.0......... ..... 200 14.00 2,800
6. Conservation office and files (1., 2., 3., & 5. must
be force ventilation with blower fan exhaust)...... 300 14.00 4,200
(all above:
R. Research and conservation temporary storage reserve. plusmech'l.
(partly clear floor space for large objects & furniture, & built-ins.)
three painting screens, partly shelf and bin storage)..... 400 14.00 .5,600

mechtl,
built-ins.
,S. Greenhouse.. .............................. 600 10.00 6,000
.

T. Toilet facilities:
1. Administrative... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 14.00 2,800
.

2. Ladies staff powder room & toilet............. 300 14.00 4,200

3. -Men's staff toilet .............................. 200 14.00 2,800
14,950 $14.44 $215,750
approx.
average
cost per
sqj.ft. J

(11. Terraces, plaza, approach walks, ramps, and surrounding

sculpture garden (prior to design layout, these figures are, of
necessity, the most rough & arbitrary)
A. Terrace, plaza, plinth, or bldg. platform (Whatever
shape(s) the bldg. itself ultimately takes, the minimum
square footage of this element, extending beyond the
peripheral walls of the bldg. itself, must maintain
 Pre-Architectural Program June 1, 19616 Page 13.*
144
Cost per
Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Cost

proportion with the mass of the bldg.)................. 30,000 10.00 300,000

B. Landscaping garden area immediately surrounding

structure (and/or interior courts).......*................ - -70,000

C. Entrance and exit drives for vehicles ............ 10,000. 3.50 35,000
D. Walkway approaches ............................ 4,000 3.00 12,000

.
E. Decorative water (reflecting pools,' fountains, etc.) ..... - -_ 100,000
$517,000

Cost per
Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. Cost
Xl. Statistical Recapitulation:

A. Allocatable interior space; basic bldg.:

1. Operations level.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,950 14.44 215,750

.
2. Public level.............................. 60,950 36.00 2,185,950
3. Service level (not counting parking area).......... 211500 9.35 201,000
4. Net interior allocatable space.................. 97,400 $26.721 32,602,700
average'

B. Plus underneath parking area; service level............. 35,000 7.00 245,000

C. Bldg. mechanical (plumbing, heating, wiring, air-
contitioning). ....................... 132,400 7.00 926,800
D. Special equipment, mechanical (elevators, shop equip.,
screen rooms, conservation equip., fork lift, movable
scaffold, etc.)............. 230,000
E. Exterior vertical wall surfacing (30,000 sq. ft. of
maximum surface: 30'x300x2: 30'x200x2; 1/2, 15,000sq.
ft., treated with granite @ $30.00 per sq. ft.) 450,000
F. Exterior horizontal, surfacing (terraces, water, drives,
walkways, landscaping) see section ViII. ............ 0 517,000
G. Interior furnishings and office equip ........... 800,000
H. Pumps, piping, controls, drains, filters, etc. for handling
decorative water......... ............... 30,000
1. Special gallery lighting:
1. Permanent collection areas (30 gallery spaces, with
20 light sources per space 600 x less than $100 per
source).......................o................. j1 60,000
 145
Cost per
Sq. Ft. fSq. Ft. Cost

2. Special exhibition area (200 movabla, visible,

clip-on-power-source grid type fixtures @
-- ----- ---- . - - - - - - - - - - - $50
10,000 maximum)......., .

J. Total cost for facilitY..........-.

----- *0- 0 -o -0 - - - - - - $5,871,5oo

K. Architectural and design fees.,--- .-------- 00* - ____POO600,00

L. Grand Total Cost of Museum.......................... 32,400 $48.42 $61471,500

X. Notes on features of particular importance to museums:

A. Lighting:
1. Natural light should ploy a vital part in illumination, consistent with the problems of
maintaining maximum lineal feet of wall for hanging pictures and avoiding those glare
and heat effects already discussed in section 11., page 2. Since there are so many
times when natural light is insufficient (museum open at night, lc'e winter afternoons,.
very cloudy day, etc., etc.), artificial light must be sufficient to do the whole job
of making complVte visual appreciation of a great variety of ,rt objects a pleasure.
owever, if natural light were excluded completely, the a-rt, and eventually the
museum visitor, seem vacuum packed in a can. The visitor must be able to relate
to nature momentarily from time to time -- to actually see ai least a small slice of
foliage, sky, sun, water. And the effects of changes in weather, position of the
sun, seasons, must penetrate the building and participate in illuminating both the
art and the observer. The creation of the ideal total visual situation, of course,
involves the physics, physiology and psychology of itt: i.e., oH levels of perception.
But, we are not after a measurable physical quantity, or a physological reaction; we
are after a psychological effect through which the museum visitor feels that both he
and the art he came to see are still a part of the real, rotating, changeable world.

2. Skylights are not the answer: the visitor cannot look out of them; the changing
natural effects don't ccrne through them effectively; they cause insufferable design
problems; require huge wasteful attic and clerestory spaces; and they always leak
no matter what Is spent on their maintenance. A clerestory natural light source is
unsatisfactory for a number of the same reasons.

3. The side-directed parallel rays of daylight are required (as with artificial, as much
as possible). The true quality of the surface of a small panel painting with even very
low impasto can be negated for a connoisseur by vast windows, diffused overall sky-
lighting, or multiple light sources.

4. In artificial illumination, fluorescent lighting is anathema. li does to art that which

was just mentioned in paragraph 3. above. It does not relate in quality to natural
light as well as some incandescent (commercial labels notwithstanding). And
it limits
the greatest quantity of those very rays that are the most injurious physically to works
of art.
P're- Arch itectural Program June I ,f1966 Page. 15.
146

5. Lighting should be incandescent; the latest quartz lamps seem to provide sufficient
brightness, with the smallest available unit to replace, handle and store (thus also
cutting down the size requirement of the fixture); their K rating seems to relate best
to most art objects visually.

6. The fixtures in the permanent collection galleries should be set into the ceiling so
that the aperture and face of fixture is flush with ceiling. Above the ceiling the
power source should be on a grid system (6 foot intervals) so that wiring can be
pulled to a fixture placed in any ceiling ponel (on 2 foot squares, approx.).

Fixtures in the special exhibition area should be suspended from an open power
source "grid" (actually transverse parallel tracks at about 6 foot intervals).

7. If the walls upon which objects are installed, plus free standing objects in center
of floor, plus glass cases, are illuminated adequately, there should be no need for
general space illumination as such (down-lighting, etc.). This is distracting.

B. Collection installation:

1. Floor bases, pedestals, glass display cases, tab!e cases, wall brackets, etc. should
be designed by the architect and produced to order by local craftsmen for specific
works of art. They should not be bought by stock items from a manufacturer's selec-
tion of module samples.

2. Walls of the permanent collection gallery area will be of excellent quality material
and should not be violated by the installation process. Changes of installation will
be relatively infrequent. Hanging pictures, therefore, should be effected from a
channel, or strip, or other device located up near tH, ceiling on the face of the
wall. This device should be designed by the architect, be part of the working draw-
ings; and produced especially to specifications. The hanging wire (or other material)
will be colored (painted) to blend imperceptibly with the color and texture of the wall.

3. Walls of the special exhibition area must be subject to frequent changes of installation,
and often these are unavoidably quick changes. They usually involve shifting wall
arrangement in plan, plus change in color. Heretofore, the best solution to this has
been a tough, coarse fabric surface, backed by 3/4 inch fir, horizontal tongue and
groove wood; the fabric removed every few years after successive nailings and coats
of paint have disintegrated, it. Hopefully, a fresh solution is to be found here.

C. Security:

1. Design layout should keep maximum surveillance of art by security force constantly in
mind.

2. There should be, the absolute minimum of doors leading from the building to the outside.
The ideal museum has only one spot where the general public enters or leaves the build-
ing: control.
Pre-Architecturol Program Jine I, 1966 Poge 16.0
147
3. Live, roving human beings as guards are the irreplaceable basis for security (corpo
to the infantry in war), but certain electronic security devices can augment the g
staff, and even cut the salary budget for it:
a. all exterior doors on electronic alarm
b. fire detection
c. limited closed circuit T.V. surveillance
d. A.D.T.

D. Internal Communication:

1. Any given floor level of the building should maintain an absolutely uniform and cm*
tinuous level surface on that given floor, with no thressholds or divider strips at door
(ease, economy and safety in moving objects).

2. An ample number of iwo-digit internal telephone stations should be installed so tKe-

rapid communication between staff, when not in their offices, can be achiewd.
between a guard on duty to central security office; between a curator working in a
gallery and his office; or, director should be able to receive a long distance call

,
in conservation laboratory without going all the way back to his office.)

3. A comprehensive system of signs and labels should be worked out as part of the arc;
tectural design problem, be designed under supervision of the architect, and have t
face and scale carefully al djsted to purpose, place and background. (Announcerne
of shows, lectures, new acquisitions, etc.; directional signs, designation of doo t
specific facilities, labels for -art objects.) Continuity of design.

E. Climcde Controi:

The principle goals are:

1. Stability (continuity, sameness) of total climate conditions maintained steadily.

2. Clean atmosphere.

3. Relative humidity steady at 55%-.

 148

APPENDIX C

Statement: Louis I. Kahn

by Richard F. Brown

Clutching a copy of a rather detailed "Pre-Architectural

Program" which we at the Kimbell Art Foundation had sent out

to about fifteen architects all over the world, the appointed

time arrived one morning in April, 1966, when I was to have

my first discussion about the program with Mr. Louis I. Kahn

in his Philadelphia office. Having gone through this pro-

cedure already with many of the other architects under con-

sideration, I anticipated with relish a normally expected

couple of hours, probably including a pleasant luncheon at a

quiet and excellent restaurant, during which each of us

would politely explore what made the other tick, and whether

entertaining the idea of a client-architect relationship

should be pursued any further.

In contrast to most of the red carpet treatments thus

far, it was mildly surprising to find Mr. Kahn and his asso-

ciates beavering away in a kind of garret space on the top,

or fifth, floor of a relatively flimsy "taxpayer"-type

structure with a drugstore at the street level. I was also

somewhat chagrined to find the single small elevator out of

order because, while skiing in Colorado that winter, I had

 149

unwisely argued with a mountain, and the mountain won, put-

ting me on crutches while lugging a huge cast from hips to

instep. Having achieved the top of the stairs in spite of

that, I realized the entire establishment consisted basically

of three spaces only.

An approximately fifteen-foot-square room with a bare

wood floor, bare windows, and bare walls (except for various

drawings, postcards and other ephermera pinned or pasted on

them) served the reception, filing, secretarial and main

access function. An extremely charming and intelligent se-

cretary who called Mr. Kahn "Lou" presided here; but she had

four people delivering or picking up various rolls of draw-

ings to cope with, and all the light buttons on her telephone

were twinkling. An affable young man who also called Mr.

Kahn "Lou" stepped in from the large doorless space at the

left and took me back in there with him. The drafting room

had fifty feet of the same bare windows and floor, and all

the pipes, ducts and conduits were bare on the ceiling. But

the activity reminded one of a beehive, with the bees crawl-

ing around from table to table, clustering at moments, busy

singly at other times. After appreciating a couple of ex-

tensive models being worked on by a group of Mr. Kahn's

students from the University of Pennsylvania, we crossed back

through the reception office and approached the wide-open

door of Mr. Kahn's absurdly miniscule office. Most of the

space is occupied by a huge wooden plank of a door set on top

 150

of two sawhorses, and this serves as his work table. In

addition, the clutter is considerable; sketches on drafting

paper precariously festoon the walls, piles of odd old books

with unexpected titles that he loves to snoop for during his

many travels occupy whatever horizontal surface Kahn can find,

and chunks of gutty Mexican lava stone lean from the bare

floor up against the wall.

Since a group of men were already in his office, evi-

dently trying to conclude a conference about cost estimates

for some project or other, and since we went right in anyway,

a sense of bedlam suddenly developed; and there weren't

enough places for everyone to sit. Claustrophobia was im-

possible, however, because the little office is at the south-

west corner of the building, and two whole walls are made

entirely of the same big bare windows that light the recep-

tion office and drafting room. The light in all these spaces

is matchless, and for Lou Kahn light is the great creator of

all things, including architecture. With such superb light

to work with, why should he move into fancier quarters?

Because the flow of ideas and their infinite refinement

never stops with Lou Kahn, the concluding phase of a con-

ference often takes as long as a whole conference. But

eventually the cost estimate gentlemen were gone, and Lou

and I were alone. I was made tremendously welcome, but ob-

viously nothing had been specially "arranged." Business went

on as usual, with numerous trips to different tables in the

 151

drafting room, specifications brought in to be checked, and

changed, decisions to be made about how he was to get from

Italy to India in connection with his overseas commissions.

I was simply permitted to rattle along in neutral observance

of all these vital activities that ultimately result in the

most pertinent building being done in the world today. I

shortly came to realize that there could be no better tech-

nique devised to instruct a potential client about what he

would be getting into if he decided to produce a building

with this madcap outfit, although there was not technique

being applied at all. As the hours passed, one could not

avoid being reminded of that old admonition not to make

sweeping statements when important interruptions were in

progress.

In between the interruptions, however, discussion did

take place. It was about proportion in the Ducal Palace

at Urbino, the character of the towers of San Gimignano,

the structure of the Romanesque church in Tournus, and many

other subject unavoidably germane to living architecture in

the latter half of the twentieth century. With full accep-

tance of the modern artistIs irrevocable historical self-

consciousness, such subjects become, not stylistic influ-

ences, but the means through which philosophical principles

can be communicated. Soon we began to extend the communi-

cability of abstract language with drawing upon bits and

pieces of drafting paper laid out on top of the big wood

 152

door slab. Assistants from the drafting room came in from

time to time, following the general drift of the discussion.

If they tore off a fresh piece of paper larger than Lou

deemed necessary to express their idea, they were relieved

of the prodigal piece and handed a partially used one, a

portion of which they were invited to use as adequate. Econ-

omy is an all-pervading attitude of operations, design and

building process.

There were innumerable positive proofs that Lou had

read and even thought about the zealously produce "Pre-

Architectural Program," and he seemed so kind about what it

had to say. What we could not know at that early stage of

our association is that his entire approach to finding design

solutions lies in what he calls euphemistically "reprogram-

ming,'" He reprograms the program; then reprograms the sche-

matics; then reprograms the preliminaries; then reprograms

the working drawings to the point where you never really

have working drawings. Even as concrete and steel and stone

and glass go up, reprogramming goes on. He finds the essen-

tial nature of his building in the process of producing it.

"What does this building want to become?" This, of course,

is in accord with the very nature of the creative process

at this point in history, when there is no such thing as

form known beforehand and as given by a tradition, a faith

or imitative revival. To insist upon knowning beforehand is

to negate creation, since each building is made at a new

 153

moment in time, in a different place, with its own individual

uses that are different from any others, Thus each building,

if it is a building that creates form, is unique; and thus

Lou Kahn is indeed a "form giver," as he has been called so

often.

But pushing forward into this unknown that cannot really

be known until it is done is risky business in a rapidly in-

flating economy, under current union conditions, and using

all manner of people whose attitude has increasingly dictated

less risk and more easy routine for more money. Great credit

is due on this count to the Trustees of the Kimbell Art

Foundation who, as to be expected, are industrial executives

not accoustomed to bearing with this kind of risk. They had

the courage and the faith to give us the chance to take the

risks, both aesthetic and economic.

Self-doubt, of course, is the great spectre that stalks

anyone whose philosophical premises commit them this far

beyond the already tested, and for a long time during design

and construction it was pretty lonely out there. It would

be difficult to find anyone with more professional conviction

than Lou Kahn, or with more stubborn patience to wait for the

building to tell him what it wanted to become. For this

reason many of his critics see him as the old philosopher-

architect, dictating godlike for a Parnassian summit. This

simply is not so. Even after construction had been under

way for some time, contractors, sub-contractors and workmen

 154

doubted the functional logic, aesthetic sense and structural

and economic feasibility of what they were being told to

build. But time after time after time, on his visits to the

site, Lou found solutions to seemingly insurmountable design

and technical problems by talking to the men who must phy-

sically make the building out of intractable materials with

their own hands. In these confrontations the master archi-

tect understood the problems from the physical workman's

point of view and was willing to alter the way to achieve

his goal ("reprogramming"). The workman began to see and

understand that goal and, because he suddenly realized his

own vital part in the creative process, he was willing to

try harder. His ideas and experience and the knowledge of

the hand became just as important as anything else. The

lovely tradition of craftsmanship flowered; look at the de-

tailing on the quarter-sawn white oak doors, the quality of

the concrete form work, the welding and joining of the mill-

finish stainless steel mullions, the laying of the pure lead

roofing sheath! God bless the craftsman who cares; and Lou

Kahn can eventually make them care because of his own patient

dedication and incredibly high standards.

The most dramatic illustration of how an evolving form

instructs everyone concerned with a building has to do with

the cycloid vaults that are the most salient feature of

the Kimbell structure. This soaring space creator was in-

voked by Kahn for a multitude of reasons. Reinforced and

 155

post-tensioned with six tendons, each of the sixteen, four-

to-six-inch-thick shells spans more than a hundred feet from

north to south. They are, because of shape in relation to

compression, plus post-tensioning, their own support, and

they finally bear only on the two-feet-square piers at the

four corners. The flat soffits between each curved vault

actually hang from them and are there only as lateral thrust

stiffeners. With this system an absolutely free space more

than a hundred feet wide and stretching all the way from

Texas to Malibu beach could be built - no columns or support-

ing walls to get in the way of a museum man's flexibility of

installation. And the natural light, coming through a three-

feet-wide slit running the full length at the apex of each

vault, is diffused by an inverted reflector hung beneath each

slit. The result is a miraculous bathing of the interior

surface of the vaults, and gentle domestication of Texas'

sometimes brutal sunlight without losing its natural quali-

ties.

The scale of the spatial units was modified to accommo-

date the client's imagined use. The profile of the arches,

and thickness and graded shape of the shells, were modified

by the structural engineer, Dr. August Commendant, who de-

termined exactly how these structures could stand. Still

there were many Cassandras who said they would not; and even

if they would, there was not way to form them up there in

liquid concrete. The supervisors, foremen and workmen on

 156

the job literally invented an ingenious but simple set of

forms that were foldable and movable. The shortest span in

the building, bridging only thirty-five feet because of a

light court that intersects one of the vaults, was chosen

for the initial pour. With double crews it took longer than

a full work day. You see, said Cassandra, more than a hun-

dred feet will be impossible; setting up, post-tensioning,

and curing must result from a contiguous pour for these things

to have structural integrity. Creation is risky, but by now

the men relished the challenge. They found the ways and

means, and the four for each succeeding vault became easier,

better in quality, and took less time. The last one, one of

the three open-front porticos, 104 feet long, started at

8:30 a.m., and the men were calmly at lunch by noon! It was

like winning the Super Bowl by a good score.

Concrete, in Lou Kahn's philosophy, is a noble material

if used nobly. The reflected Texas light, bathing the bare

concrete interior surface of the vaults, endows that surface

with a subtle richness comparable to a "silvery powdered

moth's wing." Although that effect may be considered decora-

tive, there is a severe logic to exactly when and where con-

crete is used. In the Kimbell building whenever you see con-

crete, without exception, that wall, pier, vault, or whatever,

is a supporting, sheer, structural member. Whenever you see

travertine, wood, or, of course, glass, that member is simply

a diaphragm to enclose space and proper climate. This

 157

structural logic is so rigorously consistent that it be-

comes a major aesthetic ordering of the building.

For Lou, architectural design is not one thing and

engineering and mechanics another; the two must become one

in the process of building. You find the most direct, frank,

economical way to support your floor slab or roof, or achieve

the space or light, and if you have achieved it rightly that

is your design. But, you may say, employing such elements

as post-tensioned cycloidal vaults does not seem so direct,

simple or economical; they are if you want that kind of space

and light. Largely because of this directness of approach,

the Kimbell Art Museum grosses approximately 120,000 square

feet of space at about $53.00 per square foot, based on the

construction contract. It is not an exorbitant cost for

space that is so monumentally exhilirating while, at the

same time, always warm, friendly and in human scale. It is

exciting but quiet, a perfect place in which to contemplate

individual works of art.

About all of this we could not even guess during that

first visit of April, 1966. But it was easy to perceive

quickly that here was a great passion for design, integrity,

quality and ruthless honesty. As the sun through the big

bare windows of the miniscule office moved farther westward

and downward, Lou's hair became haloed by it, so his mop

looked wispier and whiter all the time. He kept talking and

drawing, holding the charcoal willow stick so lightly that

 158

sometimes you could barely see the lines that someday might

be a huge wall. The movement of the stick over the paper

was not controlled only by the fingers, but by the whole

hand and arm, much in the manner of a Chinese calligrapher

or Zen sumi-e painter. Absorption was so great that nobody

even thought of lunch until late in the afternoon. It was

too late to go out, and besides, there was too much to do

and talk about. So cold sandwiches and milk were brought in,

and mustard and ketchup got mixed in with the charcoal dust.

Darkness had settled by the time I could tear myself

away to catch the train back to New York. All day I had

noticed Lou glancing repeatedly down at my leg cast and the

big woolly shoe mitten I had to cover the discolored,

frayed end of the cast and the now blue and scabrous toes

that projected from it. He finally reached down and pulled

the mitten off, while asking me why I wore it. I explained

that I was afraid of spoiling people's appetites if I ever

happened to go into a fancy restaurant with all that showing.

But he objected that it would be much better not to cover up

anything and show the full nature and relationship of the

cast to leg, including their present condition which was a

record of how they got that way. His buildings are like

that, too.
 159

APPENDIX D

Marshall D. Meyers interview with Louis I. Kahn

11 August 1972

"The Wonder of the Natural Thing"

LIK:

I'll tell you what I feel. I feel that natural materi-

als have a way of blending together. There's something

about nature's making of the material---somehow there's more

sympathy amongst materials, a cross-sympathy of materials in

nature, whereas if we paint, any variety of paint (and it

surprises you almost every time when you see one paint a-

gainst another how they don't work together) where if you

took a collection of natural materials (which have a great

variety of color) and you put them on a table they all blend

together. So the first sort of instinctive reverence one

has about the importance of decision is that the natural

materials when they do come together - there is - there could

be a greater immediacy of the sympathy between materials.

And it's always the same---whereas one says that you

will have a matte finish which is manufactured by one person

as being matte in one way different from another. So in the

matching of materials with all the great number of materials

that are on the market there is always great apprehension,

you see, that either the color will be discontinued so you

 160

can't renew it or it will prove to be that the gray of one

manufacturer is not the same gray, even with the same name,

as that of another manufacturer. Now of course that's not

a very deep reason, it's just simply one of the running

reasons why you instinctively go to natural materials.

Also let us say you're attracted to natural materials

because you're almost looking forward to the natural varia-

tions that the material has. As material that's manufactured

you're always in a state of apprehension as to the variations

that occur by the "artistic," let's say, whims of the manu-

facturer. You see it's kind of a--that the whole idea,

Marshall is to say that we're going away rom the wonder of

the natural thing. And if we imitate it ou really sell

yourself short. You're attracted to the aterial because

it's very---it's closely---somehow you almost inherit natu-

rally sort of an instinct for the use of nature's availa-

bilities because you actually in the course of your own

making, you made choices which had to do ;ith what was

available that way.

I think to answer properly, but it's just the idea,

it's a reverence problem---you see what I mean really.

Now in nature there are no polished materials so why

do we want stainless steel not to be polished? We don't

like it polished because you don't want to see yourself in

the material, for one to see your image in the material.

And in stainless steel particularly the flash of stainless

 161

steel tends to highlight, give a multiplicity of highlights

which you admire at a certain point and it tells you much

about the shape. But the polish of a stainless steel member

has a tendency to be entirely highlight and it sets all the

other values, it recedes all other values, and it simply

isolates and becomes ostentatious in itself. And therefore

the sense of its unity, the sense of the blending, so that

you can read the walls for their length and their height and

their thickness is all gone because there's one that the eye

is attracted to more and you do not feel the unity of the

materials. So you see it becomes a staccato note, a con-

stantly staccato note which takes away all the other blend-

ings. It's like a constant lightning, you know. You admire

it but you really expect the serene, the repose---and also

a building must be really in repose and sort of take its

place in the way it makes a mountain noble like a temple does.

But if the temple were of stainless steel it would ruin the

mountain. It just would be so glaring that the mountain

would look muddy, where the mountain is actually very beau-

tifully bright.

The use of travertine in the walking areas of the museum

is a very excellent material because it is naturally not a

slippery material. Marble is certainly very nice in a museum

but it is slippery and besides anything glaringly white,

let's say, or very polished against concrete has too much

contrast - while that which has a similar tone to concrete,

 162

---let us say for instance travertine is very much like

concrete---it almost has the character at times that con-

crete and travertine look like the same material. That

makes the whole building again monolithic and it doesn't

separate things. If you had a contrasting material the

concrete would look dirty, muddy---whereas---white would

make concrete look very bad because concrete would look

really dirty and white would be very white and the contrast

between the materials would make both materials rather not

belong to each other. Where travertine and concrete belong

beautifully together because concrete must be taken for

whatever irregularities or accidents in the pouring that

reveals itself. One must in every way avoid any kind of

irregularities in a purposeful, artistic kind of way. Ar-

tistic being put in quotation marks as being rather a fault

than a virtue.

In my own experience, you know, in Salk, where I or-

dered the concrete to be contrasted with slate and it hap-

pened, just as a matter of market balance, that slate proved

to be more expensive coming from Italy than travertine.

They were getting material which comes as ballast. And

because they had some arrangements, boat arrangement, in

La Jolla, I was asked whether I would not accept travertine

instead of slate and for the moment I thought, gee, I'll

lose my contrast. But then I said, gee, it's a great

material, so let it come. And I couldn't have made a better

 163

decision at that moment. Thinking that the contrast would

make both things brilliant but actually the travertine and

the concrete are so much together that it now looks to

people as though that building were there thousands of

years ago, because the decision of its harmony, which takes

many years to attain, was there already, right?---as a new

building it already had the harmony of something which was

aged. So even a material like stainless steel and other

materials which at first seem clashing would eventually,

after many years, become rather unified, the weather would

unify them in some way or other. And this was an immediate

kind of unification. So the contrasting material is also

eliminated here as a blending then of wood and travertine

and concrete which are so subtle that each material never

ruins the other, never really takes over and ruins the

other material. And that's why the choice.

MDM:

How does this relate to the idea of the way light

changes its mood--as you've talked about before. Is there

anything about the variety and the character that materials

have that also--I see a connection, I'm trying to say, be-

tween the variety in the natural materials and the changing

(dynamic) variety of the moods of light throughout the day,

as opposed to paint which is static and the electric light

which is static.
 164

LIK:

I noticed when I was at a house I built many years ago

and I had specified tsand-finished plaster and. I looked

at
the walls and I wondered why---"it's a lovely color, " I
said to the client, "this lavender you put on the way, but.

I remember I specified sand-finished plaster."

He said,
"we didn't touch it, we love everything
you do you see, we
didn't touch it." And I look around and I said, by gum,
this wall is lavender. And it is actually the natural,
sand-finish white plaster. The little granules of sand that
were on the surface of the plaster cast numerous,
numerous
minute shadows and because the light was of that
kind of
yellow which projected, which gave you a purplish shadow

and the whole wall became purple,

not purple, lavender,
subtle, a very subtle lavender and it was sao delightful.

Now on the wall where the shadow was not,

the color was
different. Just see what a variety you get merely by
the
entrance of natural light into a building which
allows the
shadow caused by the natural light to be an added
color--
so I'd say the sun is after all possibly the
greatest paint-
er. And the time of the day and the season of
the year,
which by the way is completely different from
the year before
and the day before throughout all of nature's
course---you
can be sure there isn't one day like the other
or one moment
like the other in light. So natural light is just an end-
less display of mood. Electric light is static and when it
 165

burns out you get another bulb and it becomes a little

brighter at that moment but the same feeling is there. Elec-

tric light will never take the place of natural light.

And in the gallery paintings were painted in natural

light in countries which probably are different from the

ones in which now these paintings are exhibited. Because

there is a great traffic between countries and countries as

far as works of art go, there is still the acceptance of the

artist himself, though he may be long gone, that the paint-

ing sits in its natural light and he expected it to look

different someday even surprising him, because he remembered

having painted it in a certain light, that he sees it now as

being more beautiful than he thought it was (or has some

surprising aspects to it) that he never could have antici-

pated. So the natural light is just full of moxie and it's

unpredictable and it's like man's nature too which is unpre-

dictable.

It is for this reason that it can be brought out the

importance of your intuitive feelings about things because

in the intuitive feeling lies a more comprehensive record

of the nature of man than does any kind of group of informa-

tion or discoveries from time to time. And I believe that

man inherits, in his intuitive, a sense of beginning which
answers to all the laws of nature and to the nature of man

in general, as you might say in the qualities of commonality.

So in the intuitive sense there are the qualities of

 166

commonality, there is also the qualities which have to do

with all the laws of the universe which is in it.

So man has this feeling that this somehow has the

unity--and I sense it though I can't prove it. The dogged

determination to believe in this intuitive sense and find

the means even if maybe it is sometimes very devious, will

give the best, best possible results --- so when a man says

that he believes that natural light is something we are

born out of, he cannot accept a school which has no natural

light, he cannot even accept a movie house, you might say,

which must be in darkness, if he's really passionately

engaged in this without sensing that there must be a crack

somewhere in the construction which allows enough natural

light to come in to tell you how dark it is. It's that

sense. Now he may not demand it actually but he demands it

in his mind to be that important.

Therefore our insistance with the greatest amount of

difficulty---and even it was marvelous that we found the

man who thought that he was equally interested in making the

calculations because his belief was the same. But his belief
was not something that was immediately translated into shape.

His belief called on the laws of nature to prove it to him

and so the combination of one who is a scientist and can't

tolerate statements that cannot be substantiated---(but he

must also have a belief that it is good to do this) and so

he finds in a way an inspired technology, and where it

 167

wouldn't be without the stimulation of another person. I

believe so much in the wonder of natural light that it re-

sulted in an invention of a shape which one could never get

to by just playing around with shapes that you like. It is

something that grew out of a real belief in the wonder of

natural light with the deepest respect for the injurious

effects of natural light that brought a scientific-minded

mind together with an art-minded mind, together to make

something which has great validity. This "natural lighting

fixture" which is rather a new way of calling something, it

is rather a new word, entirely. It is actually a modifier

of the light, sufficiently so that the injurious effects of

the light are controlled to whatever degree of control is

now possible. And when I look at, Marshall, I really feel

it is a tremendous thing--don't you think so?

MDM:

When we first thought of this idea of having--we didn't

know how to make it...

LIK:

Well you have such an affinity for it yourself--this is

something I noticed in you--how really interested you were

in that.
 168

MDM:

Well when the idea came that there would be a possi-

bility of making a reflector that you saw through, that

also put the light on the shell--I didn't know a curve, I

didn't know the technology, I only had a sense of it. From

that point, once we worked with Kelly and then he had to get

someone also to actually put it through a computer and so

forth, and we went from glass (which is still a way, but

it is too expensive) to another way which was perforations

which is the same idea...

LIK:

I think you ought to talk about that because you ought

to add it to show what the path is to get something. You

see it really is a very difficult one---but don't neglect

our Director who at the same time believed in it in his way.

MDM:

It's all there in his program.

LIK:

I think that's as good a story as anything you want to

know because that darn thing looking up there is the best

proof. It's the result of something.

 169

MDM:

An it starts with a belief in the natural light being

there to begin with which starts with Ric Brown and that's

why he found you, I'm sure--one of the reasons--because

there's a sympathy, he saw a sympathy. And that's fantas-

tic.

LIK:

It is fantastic yes.
 170

APPENDIX E
 171

m-
NJ

Nl- o
IP.
CQ

4 I c6

Ip

i4 f'
38 I1i
2~ *{
9

$ I 4 I

31

4
 172

ts
3z

4
4
Ns
IA6,
Lii
t
4 7 0,1 j

41
7 g
.2:
 173

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Angerer, Fred, Surface Structures in Building, New York,

Reinhold Publishing Co., 1961

Cook, John W. and Henrich Klotz, Conversations with Archi-

tects, New York, Praeger Publishers, Inc., 1973.
Forward by Vincent Scully.

Futagawa, Yukio and Marshall D. Meyers, Louis I. Kahn,

Global Architecture, vol. 38, Tokyo, 1976.

Heyer, Paul, Architects on Architecture, New York, Walker

& Co., 1966.

Kahn, Louis I., Light is the Theme: Louis I. Kahn and the
Kimbell Art Museum; Comments on Architecture~by Louis
I. Kahn, compiled by Nell E. Johnson, Fort Worth, Kimbell
Art Foundation, 1975.

Kimbell Art Museum, Catalogue of the Collection, Fort Worth

Kimbell Art Foundation, 1972.

Komendant, August, Eighteen Years with Architect Louis I.

Kahn, Englewood, New Jersey, 1975.

Wurman, Saul and Eugene Feldman, editors, The Notebooks and

Drawings of Louis I. Kahn, Cambridge, M.I.T. Press, 1973.

Articles

"Concrete: Where do we go from here?" Progressive Archi-

ture, XLVII (October, 1966, 172-226.

"An Interview with Dr. Richard Brown, The Kimbell Art Museum:
Art and Etiquette," Texas Metro, XL (October, 1970).

Jordy, William H. "The Span of Kahn," Architectural Rview,

CLV (June, 1974), 320-6.

Kahn, Louis I. "A Statement," Arts and Architecture, LXXXI

(May, 1964), 18-19, 32.
 174

"The Room, the Street, the Human Agreement," AIA Jour-

nal, LXVI (September, 1971), 33-34.

"Kahn's Museum: An Interview with Richard F. Brown," Art

in America, LX (September-October, 1972), 44.

"Lead Cover's Roof with Eye Appeal," Building Design & Con-
struction Magazine, LXVII (July, 1972), 24-27.

"Louis Kahn in India: An Old Order on a New Scale," Archi-

tectural Forum, CXXV (July, 1966) 39-47.

McLaughlin, Patricia, "How'm I doing, Corbusier?" The

Pennsylvania Gazette, LXXI (December, 1972), 18-26.

McQuade, Walter, "Architect Louis Kahn and his Strong-boned

Structures," Architectural Forum, CVII (October, 1957),
135-141.

"The Mind of Louis Kahn: -Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth,

Texas," Architectural Forum, CXXXVII (July-August,
1972), 57-61.

Page, Clinton, ed., "Light starts with daylight, to Richard

Kelley, Daylight is as important to architecture as
electric light," Progressive Architecture, LIV (Septem-
ber, 1973), 82-85.

Plagens, Peter, "Louis Kahn's New Museum in Fort Worth,"

Artforum, VI (February, 1968), 18-23.

"Post-tensioned Shells Form Museum Roof," Engineering News-

Record (November 11, 1971), 24-25.

Scully, Vincent, "Light, Form, and Power: New York of

Louis Kahn," Architectural Forum, CXIX (August, 1964),
162-70.

Shepard, Richard F., "After a Six-Year Honeymoon, the Kimbell

Art Museum," Art News, LXXI (October, 1972), 22-31.

Seymour, A. T., "Contractor Challenged by Kimbell Art Museum

Design," Texas Contractor, Public Works Issue LXIII
(November 21, 1972), 20-24.

Smith, C. Ray, "The Great Museum Debate," Progressive Archi-

tecture, L (December, 1969), 85.
 175

Newspaper Articles

Fort Worth Star-Telegram, August 7, 1970.

New York Times Magazine, November 15, 1970.

Fort Worth Star-Telegram, April 22, 1973.

New York Times, April 7, 1974.

Fort Worth Press, May 4, 1969.

Fort Worth Star-Telegram, November 9, 1964.

Fort Worth Star-Telegram and Fort Worth Press Special

Supplement, October 1, 1972.

Unpublished Sources

Brown, Richard F., "Statement: Louis I. Kahn,1" unpublished

paper, Fort Worth, 1972.

Kahn, Louis I., letter to Velma Kimbell, Philadelphia,

June 25, 1969.

Kahn, Louis I., "Outline Specifications for Preliminary

Working Drawings," December 30, 1968.

Kimbell, Kay, Last Will and Testament, extract, Tarrant

County, Texas, n.d.

Kimbell Art Foundation, "Projected Architectural Costs and

Time Schedule Based on Suggested Architectural Contract,"
unpublished paper, Fort Worth, Texas, August 29, 1966.

Kimbell Art Foundation and Louis I. Kahn, design agreement,

Fort Worth, Texas, October 5, 1966.

Kimbell Art Museum, "Policy Statement," Fort Worth, Texas,

June 1, 1966.

Kimbell Art Museum, "Pre-Architectural Program," Fort Worth,

Texas, June 1, 1966.

Meyers, Marshall D., letter to Nell E. Johnson, Philadelphia,

August 18, 1972.
 176

, letter to Becky Connally, February 1, 1977.

Seymour, A. T., letter to Kimbell Art Foundation, estimate

of the construction cost of the Kimbell Art Museum,
April 7, 1969.

, "K.A.M. Early Correspondence. August, 1966-January,

1969, " file of miscellaneous correspondence and papers,
Fort Worth, Texas, Byrne & Co., Inc.

,_ "K.A.M. Correspondence with Preston Geren, 1969-72,"

business file, Fort Worth, Texas, Byrne & Co., Inc.

Interviews

Brown, E. B., Building Manager, Kimbell Art Museum, Fort

Worth, Texas, June 7, 1977.

Brown, Richard F., Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas,

December 18 and July 23, 1975.

Fortson, Kay, member, Board of Trustees, Kimbell Art Museum,

Fort Worth, Texas, February 11, 1976.

King, Bowen, former Business Manager, Kimbell Art Museum,

Fort Worth, Texas taped , August, 1976.

Kahn, Louis I., with Marshall D. Meyers, "The Wonder of the

Natural Thing,'" Fort Worth, Texas, August 11, 1972.

Meyers, Marshall D., Fort Worth, Texas, February 10, 1975,

and October 6, 1976.

Robb, Frances, Fort Worth, Texas, October 10, 1976.

Rothrock, Ilse, Fort Worth, Texas, May 14, 1975.

Seymour, A. T., Fort Worth, Texas, August 17, 1975.

Sherwood, Frank, staff member, Associate Architect's Office,

Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas, July, 1974.