apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

I understand the significance of the architect, but the building is ugly imo, and doesn't work well as a library.

It is so delightful to find out about another masterpiece by Mies. Thanks for posting!

I think the challenge to appreciating his work it that unless it is well taken care of, the details that make it so amazing tend to fall away and people just see a glass and steel building. Its all about symmetry...

This place is a total dump. It will probably cost a fortune to restore it. Plus it's somewhat of a haven for homeless people. I don't think it's worth the effort or expense to try and save it. Sorry, architecture lovers, I'm just not feeling it.

The building should go. I appreciate the architectural significance, but it can no longer serve the pupose for which it was built and it provides a terrible streeetscape. Let's take some photos and move on! DC deserves a better, more functional library!

Here's something else that should go...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/06/AR2007120601678.html

Hmm, I'm not a DC person, but I'd love to see this go. I'm not a fan of this sort of architecture, its just a big ugly black box to me.

I'd love to see a modern interpretation of the classic Palladian-esque DC architecture, which is so lovely.

I understand the complaints, but I think we have gone a little too far in just throwing away perfectly good buildings, particularly those that hold history in this country. This building has been sadly neglected and while it may not fit with all modern preferences, that is hardly a reason to just scrap it. The building represents a revolutionary movement in architectural history and that should not be overlooked, and budget should not even be an issue in DC anymore, given the insane growth the city has seen over the last decade.
Not to be all bleeding heart, but the fact that the homeless are wise enough to use the MLK's generous overhang as shelter should not be any sort of justification to destroy it. Homeless always have been and probably always will be a part of city life, and changing the design of this building will not solve that problem.

I definately agree that scrapping it does nothing whatsoever to address the issues of the homeless. Though neither does saving it.

My issue with the building is that if it's a revolutionary movement in architectural history, it's also (IMHO) a regrettable one. So for that reason, I'd love to see it torn down and replaced with something -- less black and boxlike.

As a DC resident, I certainly appreciate the MLK library's pedigree a bit more. Alas, it is quite a dump. It would take some major resources to beautify it. Also, practically speaking, the donut structure of the building -- rooms around the edge, nothing in the center -- rather limits how many books can be stored there.

This may have been Mies' only library building, but it's not the only library. Also just before his death, he completed the Social Services Administration building at the University of Chicago. About a quarter of this building is a library, and he designed the most inappropriate library furniture, too. The book carts are wider than they are tall. The card catalogue (which is no longer used anyway due to developments in online databases) barely had enough room to fit the cards for the books the library had when it opened.

Probably the most well-known story of the building is that it has no facilities for users with disabilities. No ramps. No elevators. None of these things which would be vital to any public building or school. The school was the target of protests in the 1970s by students with disabilities, which is quite an embarrassment for an institution that should be producing social workers. The greatest irony comes from the fact that Mies himself had difficulty walking during his last days, and he was not able to participate in the opening ceremonies for the building because he had not made it accessible to people with disabilities. (Folklore says that he had to wait in the lobby.)

http://flickr.com/photos/pgoyette/285673434/
http://flickr.com/photos/valbrazil/1356351199/

Most importantly, a library would probably never be built like this today for book preservation and energy concerns. The greenhouse effect created by the plate glass walls meant that the climate for the books fluctuates more widely throughout the day and seasons. The light damages books over the long term.

I should have mentioned that the SSA building (that I mentioned above) is beautiful. Even though it has been adapted to overcome these concerns, and some folks even painted murals which are a bit too colorful and unattractive in context. When I worked at the library, it was a pleasure to work in that building compared to any of the other libraries on the University of Chicago campus. It attracted students from all over campus because of the natural light and sunlit-warmth even on winter days.

It is a masterpiece, a piece of art and a piece of history -- it should be polished up and preserved. Same for the Christian Scientist Church linked above. End of story.

(opinionated -- moi?)!

On an editorial note, I have to say I dispute the statement at the beginning of the article that there are few modernist building in DC -- the entire L'Enfant Plaza area and much of SW DC urban renewal areas (ok -- whoever goes there unless they have to . . . ); that FABULOUS Brazilian embassy building -- the list goes on, but at the top -- Dulles Airport!

On that note --- go see the exhibit on Saarinen at the National Building museum -- excellent.

Yes, lots of modernist architecture in DC, including a ton better than this monster. Too run-down for too long, a design that attracts the homeless because of the huge sheltering overhangs, and a DC government that cannot do justice to decent buildings. Just because a famous guy designed it, doesn't make it a work of genius. And just because a local board of bureaucrats wants to preserve it doesn't make them right.

This isn't that different from the Mies building in Des Moines, only bigger.
http://www.absolutedsm.com/images/Skywalk%20Views/21.jpg

I personally love that building, as I do this one.

I guess I'm some sort of philistine, but I've never seen the appeal of the sterile, characterless, energy-wasting glass box. And it's not like we have some sort of shortage of them; every big city I've ever been to has been chock-full of these ugly things.

Maybe it could be re-purposed. As is, it may be the poster child of form over function. It's (become?) a sad, sad library.

Turn it into lofts.

Mid-C Frank -- you are right there is a lot of mid-century in SW and it's horrible. L'Enfant Plaza (the irony of the name!) is terrible on so many levels. I worked in it for 5 years. It's so close to the Mall and yet my office might as well have been in a cave in Herndon. The architecture gives absolutely no thought to the pedestrian.

And don't forget the FBI building and the Kennedy Center -- the former is an autrocity, the later has grown on me despite the fact it is so disconnected. I do love Dulles -- I want to buy one of those mobile lounges!

"I think the challenge to appreciating his work it that unless it is well taken care of, the details that make it so amazing tend to fall away and people just see a glass and steel building."

Um, sure, but it's a LIBRARY. It's supposed to function as one. Whether or not it has fabulous modernist architectural details is totally irrelevant to its success as a building if it doesn't achieve its stated purpose. Koolhaas' library in Seattle is another architectural masterpiece, *and* a functional library to boot. This one lacks a key feature: adequate room for books. The lobby epitomizes the problem: huge, perhaps architecturally striking, but useless open spaces usurp the space for books in the building. I'm not advocating tearing it down--I agree we throw things out too easily here--but I likewise believe we adhere too slavishly to an "artistic vision" that too often is at odds with a building's actual function. Let's renovate it and make it work as what it is meant to be.

(And I grew up in DC and used the library in the 80s, so my complaints have nothing to do with the recent deferred maintenance.)

I live in DC. It is an awful building. It does not function well in any capacity. I've tried to do research there. I've sung there with my choir for MLK day. It stinks. DC deserves a glorious library as our Capitol City. If this building must be preserved for architectural purposes let it be an office building. It does not work as a public space. When I need to really use a library this is the last place I got. Arlington VA's library is much more user-friendly.

This post scares me because I live in Seattle, where the new library designed by Rem Koolhaus (could he have been anything other than an architect) takes up an entire city block. Now, Koolhaus took every aspect of book preservation and use into account when he designed the library, but its still a mess of staggered floors, neon floorlights, and massive stretches of white walls just waiting for graffiti. I wonder what it will look like in 30 years, and whether we will be having this very same argument...

thanks for the history. i think it's a beautiful builiding and i love the big and airy lobby. they sell books there for a steal.

it may not be the most attractive building, but it has historical and architectural significance, which is why, to me, it should be preserved. At least it stands out from all the neo-classical buildings downtown..
Also, I have no problem with the fact that the homeless find it a useful place to get out of the elements. They're not blocking the entrance anyway, but usually off to the side.

Southwest DC may have some ugly mid-century architecture, but it also has at least one totally cool property, namely River Park, which was done by Charles Goodman, an IM Pei disciple -- open floorplans, lots of glass, and still affordable not far from the center of the city. There are apartments there going for around $125k and it's two blocks from a subway, five blocks from the new Nationals Stadium, three blocks from the new Arena Stage, three blocks from the soon-to-be-new waterfront, &c.