A monument to modern architecture that defied norms of practice.

Of all the monuments to modern architecture, one building stands out that defied all norms of good architectural practice but still went on to become a monument and is now a place for exhibitions showcasing modern architecture. The description of the entire set of events in the design and construction of this house actually reads like a manual on 'how not to provide architectural services'

Consider the facts. Initially, when the client met the architect, she had bought land for a weekend retreat and wanted to have a house built there for about $8,000 to $10,000.00 The architect convinced her that it was not possible, and a more realistic figure would be around $40,000.00. Still the house ultimately cost around $74,0000.00 including the architectural fees and services.

The site of the house was in the flood plains, but somehow the architect missed the point. The house used to get flooded every time when the water level rose requiring extensive repairs every time this happened. The house had also other major flaws like leaking roofs, a poorly ventilated fireplace, and swarms of mosquitoes.

After completion of the house, the owner refused to pay the architect, who sued her for recovery of his fees. The owner countersued the architect for deficient services but lost the case. Ultimately, the issue was settled by the owner agreeing to pay the architect about 20% of his balance fees. 

The entire house was enclosed by glass walls, but the architect used single pane glass construction, leading to inadequate temperature control. The glass walls gave the house very little privacy and the owner, who described her experience of living in the house as a caged animal, finally installed blinds and shrubs.

The owner eventually sold the house to a second owner, who was fascinated by the architect's work and paid more than $100,000.00 for the house and spent another $500,000.00 for its renovation. Unfortunately, there was another flood after this renovation, and the second owner had to spend additional $250,000.00 on repairs after the flood. Eventually he sold the house to National Trust for Historic Preservation, who manages it now.

This is the 'Glass House', designed by Mies van de Rohe for Dr. Edit Farnsworth. It is now considered a masterpiece of the minimalist style of modern architecture despite all its flaws. It represents the concept of architectural design as a design of space, which is defined and articulated by the elements of construction like the floor plate and the roof supported by a slender frame of columns with glass walls. The house defies the traditional concept of architectural form and relies for its effect on the perception of space as felt by the occupant, by use of a glass enclosure that visually merges the interior space with the nature outdoors.

The idea of a retreat is essentially to experience first-hand the tranquility of the natural surroundings to calm and refresh your mind, and Mies's design has therefore inspired many generations of architects in their design of retreats. This goes to show that creative inputs are far more important in architectural design than the issues of construction, which, after all, are repairable. However, this principle is applicable only to outstanding architectural masterpieces, not to be followed in everyday architectural practice.