The building of the Museum of Modern Art in Warsaw – long before it was built – managed to provoke considerable discussion about the form it should take. This fact comes as no surprise if we consider how long the Museum has been waiting for the realisation of its final building. Even before the official opening, which took place on 25 October, the investment had already attracted the attention of countless art lovers and residents of the capital. It is not difficult to notice how many critical voices have been raised against the building, as well as its author, the British architect Thomas Phifer, and his studio. Let us therefore take a look at one of the most famous architectural projects in Poland.
author of the text: Kevin Barczak
The rectangular-plan building with a slender white prism adjacent to one of the facades was most likely dictated by the zoning conditions of a plot of land located in the very centre of the capital. The block, open at the arcade level and supported on concrete pillars, has two storeys, separated by a characteristic horizontal cut, which like a white ribbon wraps around the building from all sides. The building’s close proximity to the main dominant feature in terms of height and style, the Palace of Culture and Science, certainly presented the designer with a considerable challenge. It is noteworthy that Thomas Phifer ‘s concept does not attempt to relate to the surrounding architectural context, but on the contrary avoids confronting the heavy historicising detail of the palace facades, reflecting the idea of imitating neo-renaissance and neo-classicism. In contrast, in relation to the other high-rise office buildings in Warsaw’s Śródmieście district, the museum project seems unpretentious, original, and not subject to fads or questionable tastes. The concept presented by the designer seems to be a timeless work, not entangled in historical contexts, not dominant in its scale and form. This unobtrusiveness of the architecture remains its great asset.
One of the basic determinants of the concept, created by Thomas Phifer, is the assumption that the architectural form of an object should correspond as much as possible to its purpose – in this case an extremely unique one – that is, to the works of art, belonging to a particular trend, which are to be exhibited in its space. With its simple, minimalist means of architectural expression, the building perfectly anticipates the mood characteristic of modern art. Perhaps it also marks a new path for architecture, which continues to become more utilitarian, focused on function, not following the whim of unnecessary decorativeness.
When thinking about the architecture of museums, it is impossible to be tempted to make comparisons with objects that have acquired iconic status. Reflecting on museum spaces in which modern art is exhibited brings to mind realisations such as the headquarters of New York’s Guggenheim Museum, designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. Thomas Phifer’s design, however, is much more restrained. Perhaps the architect felt that the museum building did not need to seek such an extravagant form, as it should not overshadow the attention, which in this case should be directed towards the reception of art. One thing is for sure, just as Wright’s project stands out strongly among the cubic, geometrised buildings of Manhattan, Phifer’s realisation introduces a fresh perspective on the varied buildings of Downtown. Moreover, the simplicity of the MSN project corresponds perfectly with the modernist development concept of the so-called Eastern Wall, designed by Zbigniew Karpiński.
The solution of opening up the ground floor arcades accentuates the democratic character of the place, as does the idea of modern art, which is intended to be an all-human and all-accessible good. In addition to functional considerations, the opening of the ground floor arcade can also be seen as a kind of invitation to the world of art. The blurring of boundaries between ‘everyday’ reality and art is increasingly being reflected in architecture. The democracy of space in public utility architecture may bring to mind the post-war construction of the Sejm and Senate buildings, the work of Bohdan Pniewski, open in the arcades and sophisticated in its modernist-classical form. The heavy concrete supports visible in the MSN project may also bring to mind those used by Pniewski in the famous Courts building in Warsaw’s Leszno district.
The interior of the Warsaw museum – an open space created by an all-encompassing whiteness – fits perfectly into the white cube concept known from modern art theory. The apparent severity of the interior is broken by the centrally located staircase, which has been given the form of a geometrised, abstract sculpture suspended in space. The sculptural motifs, which can also be found on the outside, break up the monotony of the white walls and give the project a thoroughly individual character.
In rebutting, as it were, accusations that Thomas Phifer’s project is too simple or ordinary, it is worth recalling the famous statement propagated by Ludwig Mies van der Rohe: less is more.
photos: whiteMAD editorial team
Read also: Warsaw | Art | Museum | Featured | whiteMAD on Instagram
