A TECTONIC ANALYSIS St. Peter’s Church in Klippan, Sigurd Lewerentz

Sigurd Lewerentz was born 1885 in Sando, the northeast coast of Sweden. As the son of glasswork manufacturer, Lewerentz inherited the knowledge to elements of construction from his father early in his life. At age eighteen, he began his education at the Chalmers Technical Institute in Gothenburg, where he learned the fundamentals of formal building construction. While travelling in Germany between 1907 and 1910, Lewerentz came in direct contact with the ideas of Deutscher Werkbund. A time when idea of Modernism was about the take on a greater presence in the architectural arena. It was also a time where his contemporaries such as Le Corbusier and Gropius have increasingly established international acknowledgement for their Modernist ideology. At the end of 1910, Lewerentz return to Sweden to participate in an alternative institution named Klara School, whose pedagogical approach was influenced by National Romanticism, Sweden’s Arts and Crafts movement led by Ostberg and Westman. The establishment of Klara school was conceived in collaboration with former schoolmate, Erik Gunnar Asplund in 1911. The experiment program however, lasted only one year. A TECTONIC ANALYSIS St. Peter’s Church in Klippan, Sigurd Lewerentz One may perceive Lewerentz’ work as a reflection of his life. His character was often described by his contemporaries as an “obsessive manner of working through a problem by series of incremental revisions, [towards] an on-going process of refinement” 1 Both his understanding of the “abstract absence of life” 2 through crematorium work and his development as an architect through great disappointments have served to reinforced his rigorous attempts to practice with the basics of materials. “His career began by confronting the practice of cremation, which shaped his understanding of life’s memory, its experience as a continuity.” 3 “The often fragmented nature of his work bears witness to the difficulties that living in a country and a time with so little popular interest and understanding for architectural quality pose for an architect of Lewerentz ambition and character” 4 Modernism at that time had dominated the architectural practice, where rationalization was the mainstream concern. As Hakon Ahlberg explains, “Sweden perhaps more than anywhere else, became an official ideology. It was hardly a fertile environment for reflective contemplation and artistic innovation.” 5 The dominances of an architectural polemics however did not last. During his ninety years lifetime, from 1885 to 1975, Lewerentz had witness many of the changes that took place in the architectural movements. His contemporaries, such as Peter Celsing and Erik Gunnar Asplund who participated in the mainstream discourse as the representing NordicModernist, received early recognition. They were however, influenced enormously by the relatively unknown Lewerentz. “There are unmistakable parallels between the configurational solutions; elements from one project were applied in another, although it is impossible to say who ultimately originated any given motif. For instance, the single pier dividing nave from aisle, realized in Celsing’s Harlanda Church, can also be seen in Lewerentz’ church in Bjorkhagen. These years proved to be the most fruitful for both careers, as Celsing’s design approach was consolidated and Lewerentz’ oeuvre saw the addition of two of his most significant buildings (both in brick) built immediately afterwards.” 6 At seventy-eight, the Church at St. Marks in Bjorkhagen (1956 to 1963) was the first project that brought Lewerentz to the international scene. This relatively humble career and his experience on crematorium and sacred architecture led to his insistence with the fundamental materials of building construction, the brick, the steel and the glass. “The severely reduced palette of materials has the same effect as a silent space. We gain an enhanced awareness of the physical presence of the church, a presence onto which we can project meanings.” 7 St. Peter’s Church “By using ordinary material, Lewerentz gains the greatest possibility of achieving a renewed reality within the material condition of the building. To make an extraordinary material special is banal. To heighten one’s awareness of a humble material like brick is poetic.” 8 Completed when Lewerentz was at the age of eighty-one. St. Peter’s Church sites in southern Sweden, in the out-skirt of Klippan. The peripheral of the site is lined with trees to reduced traffic noise [fig. a]. The building is slightly offset from the traffic intersection. The building is geometrically generated, which Lewerentz described as “circumstantes” or “open circle”. It simulates the congregation surrounding the performance of “sacrament”. St. Peter’s composes of a square and a L-shaped block. The square building houses the church, belfry and wedding chapel, while the L-shaped building procides the function of parish hall, parish offices, and recreation room and youth center [fig. b]. The church is oriented North-South longitudinally, with the altar facing east, while the L-shaped building situated towards east and south against the prevailing wind. It forms a communal street and courtyard as an extension of the meeting rooms. The main volume of the church is made of bricks with vaulted roofs supported by a pair of composite I-beams that spans approximately 60 feet across the width of the church. The wall thickness tapers subtlety from 55 centimeters to 40 centimeters [fig. c], south to north respectively. The heavy masonry wall in the congregation to minimize the sound penetration as well as implying a sense of spatial differentiation from the belfry. ‘Lewerentz spent a lot of time on site developing the details, and it is in the details that the building lives most profoundly. The crudeness, almost clumsy or ugly in places, one knows to be deliberate. It is an old man’s building, and the weight of a lifetime’s experience is somehow encapsulated.” 9 As described by Ford, Ahlin and Dymling and Constant, scholars on the works of Lewerentz, St. Peters Church is a masterpiece by an old man. Late projects, especially St. Mark at Bjorkhagen and St. Peter carries palpable, tectonic eloquence. One, as the results of a life long, attempt and research to resolve and understand the problems of construction. In designing St. Peter’s Church, Lewerentz set up rules of parameters. First, he insisted on the rigorous and thorough use of brick all through out the building. The walls, floors, vaulted roofs; altar, pulpit, chancel, high chair and priest’s bench are all made of bricks. Secondly, he will solely use 100 mm module bricks. Thirdly, the brick were to be un-cut. The first rule of insistence came from his empirical rationale, while the second, was a result from a lack of communication when ordering the new module (100 mm) bricks he had intended to use for St. Peter’s10. The bricks are dark brown in color and rough in texture, they were products from Helsinborg. Many those bricks were imperfect. Lewerentz was not pleased with the qualities however; he did indeed, enjoyed hand picking those bricks and set them at the wall that enclosed the vestry. The mortar was transported from Hardeberga, they are dry mixtures that included ground slate for achieving the color Lewerentz wanted. Because those bricks were un-cut, under local and odd conditions such as corners and edge of sloping roof, Lewerentz had to broaden the thickness of mortar (some as wide an inch) in order to make up the difference in the module. As a result this application, the wall were read as though bricks were embedded in a matrix or a pool of mortar, rather than bricks laid up in a free bonded course. The effect of this brickwork is earthiness, which generated a space that is almost indistinguishable until the eye gradually adapt to the gloom and dimly lit interior. “This effect bring with it memories of ancient brickwork, Byzantine and Persian and well as indigenous vernacular of farm buildings.” 11 Or what Edward Ford and Peter B. Jones described as an “archaic appearance”. The floor tiles were subjected to the same treatment, where instances of peculiar and un-traditional arrangements and patterns began to appear [fig d]. It was obvious that such on-spot work will be a labor-intensive effort and spontaneous decision-making on site. Often during the construction, he would spend two or three full days per week on site to oversee the construction. This expression of zealous for building helped propel the sense of solidarity among the construction workers at Klippan. “One would even remove his cap each time he entered the church to carry out some task. There was a general feeling that here they were engaged in something unique” 12 Contrary to this technique of “improvisation” that took place on site, “ Lewerentz drew the setting-out of every brick at a scale of 1:20, and then demanded that the brick layer should use neither plumb-line nor spirit-level.” 13 The walls in the congregation are compiled of three layers of bricks. Two layers facing exterior are set together, while the one adjacent to interior is pull apart to allow ventilation units to fit within the cavity. It is similar to the double layer curtain-wall. This detail is applied across the building. One has the sense of air surrounding a brick envelope. The presence of brick also entails a feeling of complete embodiment of the enclosure. Where the subtle slope of the sanctuary floor urges the congregation towards the altar and the fabric of brick walls that surrounds us. Fig. a Fig. b & c Fig. d Fig. e Fig. f Fig. g Windows are mounted on the outside of the wall surface; they are never framed into [fig. e & f]. Similarly, the doors are placed on the outer surface of brick walls. The double glazed tinted glass is held in place by four small stainless steel clips and each secured by two screws and covered with sealant on four edges. This detail created an effect when viewing from inside, that no window was visible. On the exterior, fragility of the perfect silver edge plane of glass is placed in contrast with the brutal and crude brick wall. It is a dialogue between heaviness and lightness. “To what extent these shifts and discontinuities are brought about for visual reasons or in compensation for the difference in physical performance between steel section and brick vault I do not know; the fact is that a technical requirement is transformed into a mystery and how this transformation is brought about is unfathomable.” 14 The undulating vaulted roof was often described by Lewerentz as a recall of the “ancient symbols of heavens”. These vaulted roofs are closely associated with Gothic tradition, as well as to Romanesque and Byzantine architectures. Their tie to religious and sacred spaces confirms their presence at St. Peter’s for Lewerentz. The gently pitched vaulted roof runs west to east towards the altar. The ceiling consists of twelve expanding and contracting brick vault as they run from wall to wall. They are supported by a series of minimal cruciform steel posts. The tectonic integration at the roof between steel and brick distinguished itself as tectonic rather than stereotomic. It gives the impression of floating on top of the beams. But they are, in fact sitting on top of a pair of transverse beams that composes of a pair of I-beams with torsion stiffener at intersection with the an additional pair of short span beams [fig. g]. The rusty and exposed steel columns supporting the vault above are welded in place un-grinded with short span beams. Although its true shape may be generalized as a “T” however, the “T” steel composite is not symmetrical [fig. h]; the short side carries the longer span of the vault [fig. i] which, resolves the structural rationale of the load behavior. The “T” composite when placed across from the altar resembles closely to the crucifix. To achieve force of equilibrium, short side of the “T” column withstands more load than the long side without tipping over. The column also fixates the main axis, as well as to establish a disposition for the furniture. As a cohesive space, all of the elements work effortlessly with angled brick pattern on the floor, which dictates the arrangement of the church seating. At first glimpse, St. Peters Church suggests a sense of didactic revelation to its tectonics, a sense of tectonic consistency. Where brick joints and edge adjacent to window ledges are exposed to its very essentials. To loosely categorize this treatment of brickwork, one can relate it to the production of the New Brutalism, where the sophistication of classical form and surface is replaced by the poetry of construction. However, when compared to architects of 19th century, say Butterfield or Berlage, their expressive use of brickwork will reveal even more rigorous consistency in its materiality than that of Lewerentz. “For an architect like Butterfield would give considerable attention to arches over doors and windows, and restraining arches in the wall above, Lewerentz takes bricks across the head of an opening apparently unsupported. This allow his brick holes to be treated in the same way on each side, asserting their geometrical purity, but it denies any expression of the way that the forces of gravity make a fundamentally different in nature to a sill.” 15 Furthermore, presumably the reinforced steel bar would be required at place where tensions are felt, however all these conditions are concealed. It is applied in a manner resembling the reinforced concrete. Another inconsistencies that can be trace to the functional application of the building. On the east façade, there consist of an elaborated arrangements of copper gutter mounted on the surface of the brick wall, however on the West façade, no visible gutters are apparent. Although the vaulted roof discharges a fair amount of rainwater, Lewerentz however, concealed the gutter within the walls of the West façade. Architecturally it is understandable, that he would allow prominence or hierarchy be given to the entry front. However, from the tectonic consistency point of view it seems to be a false decision. [fig. j] “In fact I find the decision most poignant (referring to its architectural or hierarchical sensitivity). In terms of pure construction or convenience, however, it makes little sense, and in terms of functional expression it might be called dishonest” 16. It is very likely that Lewerentz was unaware of Kahn’s work, but it is fair to assume that both shared a similarity in their line of pursuit. Both wished to discover a new potential use of brick, while avoiding specific references to historic typologies. Both perceive the brick as grounds for problem solving. While Lewerentz defined a set of rules, such as no cutting of bricks, Kahn gave a breadth of life to it, his infamous quote, “even a brick wants to be…” Though neither was content to use it alone, Kahn’s method at Rochester Unitarian Church was structurally integrating it with concrete, while Lewerentz engaged it with steel. Where Kahn uses an arch to describe a window opening, Lewerentz instead conceal it with a concrete lintel. One other builder of less prominence but carried the same passion for reinventing the use of brick is the Uruguay engineer Eladio Dieste. The Atlantida Church (1960) in Uruguay [fig. l] bears the same vocabulary of rough texture, similar to St. Peter’s Church. However, stepping away from the brick wall, one began to adore and realize the precision of the undulating brick surface as the bearing element. No visible steel were shown, as they are concealed within the brick cavity for strengthening the curvaceous wall. Unlike St. Peter’s heavy appearances, the brick wall at Atlantida Church seems to suggest lightness and fabric-like materiality. “Each wall is 7 meters high and is formed by a succession of conoids with a straight directrix at floor level. The upper part of the walls is curved using one parabola and two calibrated half parabolas for each curve surface. The wall is 30 cm thick and the wire reinforcement placed in the bricks is 3 mm.” 17 At Atlantida Church [fig. m], the homogeneity of the overall palette seemed to work in greater coherence than in St. Peter’s. All structural and tectonic materials are made of bricks. The only visible non-brick material is the crucifix, benches and perhaps the floors. One can argue that Uruguay engineer Eladio Dieste is in fact, more rigorous in achieving the sense of totality and determinacy with brick than Lewerentz. However, as Sven Ivar Lind argues, the relative meaning of mastery does not exist solely in the technological expertise, or the familiarity with materials, or does it express in signature formal gestures. Rather, he says, “it is a matter of mastering oneself”, mastery he insists does not accompany the archetype. “ A singular expressive form, technical innovation, or particularly successful generalized solution to a design problem may qualify as masterful. Once created, such an archetype can be acquire and used by master architects and beginners alike.”17 When examining the floor plan of Atlantida Church, its symmetrical order utterly clear. Its static disposition of spatial configuration in relation to the tectonic expression seems irrelevant. In other words, the undulating walls do not contribute to any of its spatial arrangement or function. The repetitively undulating roof suggests no hierarchical relationship between the seating and the altar. In other words, the sensuous brick skin bears little relationship to the immediate program of the interior. Fig. h Fig. i Fig. j Fig. k Scale model of St. Peter’s by Alex Zee to investigate the structural and tectonic ideas behind Lewerentz’s design. Fig. l Fig. m Contrasting from Atlantida Church, in St. Peter’s Church, the approach towards the altar seems to correspond with the materiality seamlessly. The exposed composite steel column, serviced as a structural support and a symbolism to crucifix. As what Lind have argued, it isn’t how much you know technically, but rather it is a kind of sensitivity that will ultimately justified it for being a masterpiece. “In attending to the raw, existential nature of his materials, Lewerentz privileges a subjective and shifting experience of the world…. By adopting a phenomenological approach, Lewerentz recognizes prayer as an individual, meditative activity. St. Peter’s is a church to humanism. Paradoxically, the material intensity of St. Peter’s is almost too much to bear. In this the church is all too closely reflects the character of its architect…… It is as though Lewerentz is compelling us to confront the condition of our existence, all of the time.” 19 From his early work on the crematorium, to his later projects for the sacred, his consistency in carry through ideas from large scale planning down to minute detail is pragmatic and empirical. Lewerentz’ ability to address the aesthetic concerns through abstracted descriptions in carefully executed buildings have affirmed his presence as an architect with great tectonic sensibility. As I have attempted to explain, his selection of materials and formal language does not put him as a defining paradigm. However, his ability to create a dialogue between materials and program sets him apart from his contemporaries. He is passionate for finding ways to define the meaning and reinterpreting the nature of the material that he uses. “In these late religious buildings he fused the spiritual and mystic qualities inherent in the Nordic affinity for nature with a concern for the sentient qualities of experience.” 20 Lewerentz’s work have in many respect achieved simplicity through complexity; they confronted the present through the words of tradition. Their significance does not present itself through the quantum leap of a formal gesture they are however, an incrementally defined references to the many works to come. Notes 1. Claes Dymling and Caroline Constant, Architect, Sigurd Lewerentz Vol. I Byggförlaget, Stockholm 1997. p.6 2. Claes Dymling and Caroline Constant, Architect, Sigurd Lewerentz Vol. I Byggförlaget, Stockholm 1997. p.9 3. Claes Dymling and Caroline Constant, Architect, Sigurd Lewerentz Vol. I Byggförlaget, Stockholm 1997. p.37 4. Claes Caldenby Two Churches. Arkitektur Förlag AB, Stockholm, Sweden 1997 p. 44 5. Hakon Ahlberg Two Churches. Arkitektur Förlag AB, Stockholm, Sweden 1997 p. 48 6. Wilfried Wang, The architecture of Peter Celsing. Arkitektur Forlag, Stockholm 1996 p. 30 7. Adam Caruso, Two Churches. Arkitektur Förlag AB, Stockholm, 1997 p. 55 8. Adam Caruso, Two Churches. Arkitektur Förlag AB, Stockholm, 1997 p. 54 9. Peter B. Jones, Intriguing Details. Spazio E Societa, Rome 1991 p.89 10. “The wrong brick had been delivered, and it was now not possible to execute the walls as he had intended. He had laid out the building module, an innovation within the construction industry which he was eager to try out. Its measurement deviated from those of common brick, meaning that runs 100mm instead of the 80mm which was the norm, had to be laid up. He had neglected to communicate this and consequently the brick that was delivered from Helsingborg was of the normal dimensions.” Janne Ahlin, Sigurd Lewerentz, arkitekt Stockholm 1987 p. 167 11. Colin St. John Wilson, The dilemma of Classicism Perspecta 24 Yale Press 1988 p. 68 12. Janne Ahlin, Sigurd Lewerentz, arkitekt Stockholm 1987 p. 170 13. Colin St. John Wilson, The dilemma of Classicism Perspecta 24 Yale Press 1988 p. 68 14. Colin St. John Wilson, The dilemma of Classicism Perspecta Yale Press New York 1988 p. 72 15. Peter B. Jones, Intriguing Details. Spazio E Societa, Rome 1991 p.95 16. Edward Ford, Of Modern Architecture. Colonnade, UVA Press 1996 p.18 17. Eladio Dieste, Eladio Dieste 1943-1996 Consejería de Obras Públicas y Transportes, Sevilla 1997 18. Sven Ivar Lind Two Churches. Arkitektur Förlag AB, Stockholm, Sweden 1997 p. 50 19. Adam Caruso Two Churches. Arkitektur Förlag AB, Stockholm, Sweden 1997 p. 55 20. Claes Dymling and Caroline Constant, Architect, Sigurd Lewerentz Vol. I Byggförlaget, Stockholm 1997. p.6 Bibliography Ford, E. Of Modern Architecture. Colonnade, UVA Press 1996 Kyrkor,T. Two Churches. Arkitektur Förlag AB, Stockholm, Sweden 1997 Jones,P. Intriguing Details. Spazio E Societa, Rome 1991 Dieste, E. Eladio Dieste 1943-1996 Consejería de Obras Públicas y Transportes, Sevilla Wilson, J. The dilemma of Classicism. Perspecta Yale Press New York 1988 Ahlin, J. Sigurd Lewerentz. Arkitekt, Stockholm 1987 Wang, W. The architecture of Peter Celsing. Arkitektur Forlag, Stockholm 1996 Dymling, C. and Constant C, Architect, Sigurd Lewerentz Vol. I Byggförlaget, Stockholm 1997