This will be a web site with materials related to my assocation for many years with the greatest person (in many ways) I have ever known. I am much aware that sentiment is shared by many who were fortunate enough to know him. The preparation was requested by the Friends of Kebyar, and just constitutes some of my memories and reflections. Whenever "BG people" get together most of the time is spend on "BG stories", which in turn include stories of his about the many creative people that were part of his life. I have tried to include on occasion an actual fact or a more sober reflection.
On Bruce Goff
The preparation of the site was prompted by a gathering held in London at the Tate Modern Gallery to honor his memory. The event was part of the London Festival of Architecture .
These particular notes were done for a talk to a private audience in a gathering on Sunday, June 22, of the Friends of Kebyar, a group formed to honor Goff's memory.
There is a "runup" piece to the Tate Event by the architectural critic Charles Jencks called Looking, learning and laughing with Bruce Goff that updates critical commentary on his work. As it happened Saturday, June 21, was the 69th birthday of Charles Jencks, and this just-received snapshot shows me watching him cutting his birthday cake, baked for him by the well-known architect Zaha Hadid (who received a degree in mathematics, let it be noted).
Perhaps we might note that Jencks (in his book entitled The Architecture of the Jumping Universe: A Polemic: How Complexity Science is Changing Architecture and Culture maintains that Bruce Goff and Frank Lloyd Wright invented "fractilian architecture" before the science itself was discovered (!).
A very nice site on Bruce Goff Architect is the one prepared by James Schildroth, who regards Goff as the most "fearless" Twentieth Century American Architect.
One of Goff's last works was the Los Angeles County Museum Pavilion for Japanese Art,
The pavilion was completed after Goff's death by the architect Bart Prince who was a good friend and trusted associate.
All these materials for the moment are rough drafts. Click on any of the links below and follow along to learn what I remember.
These two relate primarily to our personal and professional relationship. Nothing exciting or important, just a chance to set it down.
This is a longer piece, just sort of a chronological description of how I connected with BG, and various aspects of that connection, which still exists, as it does with anyone who ever knew him.
It is not part of any formal analysis of his work, or anything else, to be read only if the history holds some interest for you, along with my random thoughts.
This explains a few of the more formal aspects of our relationship (and explains that while I always felt it a bit uncomfortable to be described in a formal way as a "partner" or even "associate" in the sense that the term is used in architecture, it certainly simplified dealing with immediate issues of "who could decide what when". The credit for successes goes to him and for failures to me.
Since I had an opportunity to work closely with him some observations may be particularly important to others. They may give a different perspective than most have given, in part because I was not in (any of) his profession(s).
This is a bit of description of how BG, at least through my eyes and in my collaborative interactions with him, created and presented his designs for specific clients. These were memorable events for me, especially realizing that he knew exactly how to "get things accepted", never a trick for him, but always a serious moment. There is a bit on "Construction", since I am not sure everyone understands or appreciates how good he was at dealing with actual contractors and workmen. Part of that charm was of course having bright and capable young assistants (myself excluded since I was an "outsider", but Bob Bowlby, Bob Faust, Bart Prince, and many others will know who I meant.
This one is a bit more "serious", and is my mostly later attempts at understanding his approach to design. Especially as I later learned after "growing up" on my own both as a professor and a practicioner of design in a totally different field, I began, and am still beginning to understand, how much of a system he actually had and how "scientific" in what is to me the proper sense he actually was.
One thing everyone seems to love is to tell stories about BG, just as he loved to tell us stories about Wright, and Endicott, and all sorts of other folks he encountered. A few of his stories about them are actually included.
It is always dangerous to start into stories, because the rest of the time can rreadily become nothing but that! Even a walk down the street with BG could become an event. He made sure if you were in a town with older construction that you noticed every misstep an architect or builder or remodeller might have made, and usually had a very twisted way of describing it: "see how the drainpipe struggled to get out and then tried to go back" or something similar was a common pronouncment. I won't repeat any comments he made about people, partially because my mind has either made sure to erase or block most of them, but he always had a "take" on anyone. These were never intended to be cruel, and he was very careful that the person described was not aware, but he knew exactly how to poke pretensions under the ground.
I just couldn't resist adding this story. Its to me mostly about the effect of having a paragraph that identified "where I went" in the wonderful book by David DeLong, but it also characterizes what is was like to work with him in a variety of ways. And I suspect the ultimate resolution of what it seemed to me could have been an enormous problem, actually became instrumental in seeing that some of the information about him would be preserved. He never wanted "followers", but I suspect as an avid reader himself of biography he would understand how interesting and important such information could (or could not) become later on. Like most stories this one is funny and sad.
I have gotten into the (for me good) habit of just starting off about anything as a link to Wikipedia. In my particular field the folks who started it were in fact in the field, and their references have become better and better (and some think are going to get worse and worse). Some universities love them (perhaps not so many) and some hate them, and I have no idea what those in architecture or art think of them.
My view is that I am not endorsing the reference, just pointing somewhere that I have looked and found to point correctly to the other references I might give And it is somewhere that is likely to be available (at no cost) to everyone. So if you don't like what they say look somewhere else. My late (undergraduate) student and good friend Paul Flaherty is primarily responsible for the original idea and implementation of AltaVista, the first great search engine, and now Google has become just an automatic part of my life, and one that just grazes the value that the Internet can provide.
In a 2000 interview (anonymous) about "the impact of the Internet in the next century" I saw it as two-fold:
So my references (if any) are in the article as their subject is encountered, and they are really only to make sure that my spelling agrees with that of someone else, and that you will have a place to start if you want to follow the topic further. Its your job to decide whether they are worthwhile or not.