Following a letter released November 27, 2020 by The ---- Johnson Study Group calling for all institutions to remove the name of Philip Johnson from "every leadership title, public space, and honorific of any form," Sarah Whiting, Dean and Josep Lluís Sert Professor of Architecture at the Harvard GSD responded on December 5, 2020.
In the letter Whiting expresses support of The Johnson Group's request, and acknowledges that Johnson's Thesis house be called "9 Ash Street" going forward.
See the full transcription of the letter below:
December 5, 2020
Subject: Letter to MoMA and the GSD
Dear Mitch and the other members of the Johnson Study Group:
Thank you for this note, which I take very seriously–both as the dean of the GSD and as a designer. Philip Johnson’s global influence in architecture in the 20th century and his grip on the field even now, 15 years after his death, cannot be overstated. And the power he wielded and continues to wield make it critical that not only his own work as an architect and curator continues to reappraised, but also that the consequences and persistent legacy of his influence in shaping the field and canon of architecture continue to be scrutinized. His racism, his fascism, and his strenuous support of white supremacy have absolutely no place in design.
At Harvard, the GSD owns a private residence in Cambridge that Johnson designed and built for his thesis project at the GSD, when he attended the school in the 1940s. At the university, the house doesn’t have an official name on record, although it is usually referred to as the Thesis House, or the Philip Johnson Thesis House, or some variation. But I fully agree with your strong point about the power of institutional naming, and the integrity and legitimacy it confers. An so we are taking steps to officially recognize the house within the university as simply “9 Ash Street”–the house’s physical address.
As you put it, this is a minor but clarifying step in making room for other legacies to come. I agree about this, too. We do not pretend to think our work, as a school, ends here. At the GSD, we are committed to doing our part to bring much-needed, long-overdue change to the field, to a fundamental reorientation toward inclusion. Johnson’s influence runs deep and wide, and across generations, and yet he is also just one figure among the entrenched, paradigmatic racism and white supremacy of architecture. Undoing that legacy–of the field, not only of Johnson–is arduous and necessary, and as a school and community we are committed to seeing it through.
Regards,
Sarah
Sarah M. Whiting
Dean and Josep Lluís Sert Professor of Architecture
Harvard University Graduate School of Design
92 Comments
Why not rename Johnson's work for the people that did all of his work for him? I've read he had students doing his thesis for him. Interns, partners, etc. Johnson should get little credit for architecture work since he couldn't even draw. He was more client than architect.
That said, this project won't stop at Johnson. You can already see the concept creep expanding to sanitize all history of the bad people, then the good people who crossed paths with bad people, etc. You can see how quickly this decision was made with no critical thought.
why is this so complicated for you?
Do you accept or deny your role in propagating white supremacy? Yes or no
Well, I've certainly benefited from a playing field, tilted in favor of me, a cis white male. Are you being serious with this question?
On two different threads you fail to understand how one idea, about preserving historical landmarks, and the history of American Apartheid is fundamentally different from removing the name of a man aligning himself with Nazis and white supremacy. I say we are not finished until we take off the names of Rhodes, Pritzker, Carnegie, Rockefeller, Mellon, Duke, Koch, Astor, Sackler and others, from museums, foundations, etc.
another sanctimonious white knight, maybe you shouldn't be talking at all? why do you think they had Philip Johnson's name in the first place--maybe his flirtations with racist europeans is not the sum total of his career?
I never even liked his work, or found it important, but he certainly "built" the MoMA architecture department and Glass House and its an act of denial to not acknowledge this fact. Its a bit telling that there is nobody even willing to argue this side, even if it is not enough to overcome the early fascism or segregationist views (which was resurgent in the 1920-30s). Your further cancelations reveal the complete absurdity of this venture--as if there are good and bad people easily separated and not good and bad inside of every human. I don't know how to weigh someone's good vs. bad actions outside of the law, and I think it is more fascist than even Johnson to try to do so.
The writers of the letter themselves are proving the value of Johnson's work at the MoMA by continuing to build (or not) on the legacy he began. As opposed to a figure like Calhoun or Hitler whose legacy is solely devoted to a widely acknowledged evil. If nobody can see the difference here, then our society is doomed to a quick death.
The Whiting letter itself is such an extreme viewpoint, I wouldn't recommend anyone go to the GSD -- considering the dean thinks the practice of architecture itself is corrupt as if nothing has changed since the 1920s: Undoing that legacy–of the field, not only of Johnson–is arduous and necessary.
"Its a bit telling that there is nobody even willing to argue this side" ...the hell are you doing then?
Canceling Dead People, is that a new M. Night movie?
Certainly nobody is arguing this at MoMA and GSD, led by scared, weak leaders. If you at least weigh one side of the debate, it means you are promoting white supremacy. Very healthy culture... "we hold these truths to be self evident, King George is bad, Georgia is now Happyland, and we demand our British Titles NOW. God save the empire"
Now you're just making things up.
"a figure like Calhoun or Hitler whose legacy is solely devoted to a widely acknowledged evil" (have driven on autobahn, learned about history, still doesn't feel the need to go to a museum with a "hitler wing"...)
Hitler or the Nazis weren't responsible for the autobahn--they just took credit for it. They were involved with Volkswagen, but didn't name it the Hitlermobile. Even so, if Hitler had designed a house i don't see a problem with naming it so -- things are what they are.
people still live in the house my dad designed, they don't call it the "sneakypete's dad's house". The idea that we will lose our history if we don't retain attributed titles is ludicrous.
Your dad's house has nothing to do with the current social justice theater of banning the names of things. The thrill is the act of cancellation, not the substance of the thing cancelled. it doesn't "make room for" anyone to hide history. It's just an empty way to signal and promote your brand using the new elite vocabulary, while doing nothing actually significant
"It's just an empty way to signal and promote your brand using the new elite vocabulary, while doing nothing actually significant"
It's a common dodge among those who cling to the status quo to portray a minor element of a movement for the movement in its entirety. It makes it easier to dismiss the movement when the status quo becomes indefensible.
"It's just an empty way to signal and promote your brand using the new elite vocabulary, while doing nothing actually significant"
As opposed to sitting back, doing nothing while trumpeting that there's NOTHING WRONG SO WHY EVEN CHANGE BRO.
Also: "social justice theater"? GTFOH with that newspeak bullshit. double plus good!
It's not a minor element, it is a thesis statement -- an attempt to personify [modern] American architecture by Johnson himself (despite the fact many disliked, hated and bypassed him). Then you can expand the circle beyond Johnson and to other works -- which now only have meaning within the Freud-Marx lens which you have applied -- the corrosive thesis that all merit or design meaning is in relation to white power and therefore suspect -- ignoring inconvenient truths that don't fit.
As you may suspect, this will not help house people, give them jobs, make flint's water clean or take the lead out of east St. Louis soil. The goal is just a new code for the next crop of Yale elites to move into power, this time there isn't even a basic level or merit or skill required, just adherence to the code.
Unless you're going to solve EVERYTHING, shut the fuck up, amirite?!
There's a logical fallacy around here somewhe... OH THERE IT IS.
"the corrosive thesis that all merit or design meaning is in relation to white power and therefore suspect -- ignoring inconvenient truths that don't fit. "
Man, I do not envy you having to defend your newly creative thesis. Good luck.
I don't understand why reactionaries like Chemex & jla seem to have this compulsion to invent things so they can be mad about them.
There's plenty in the world to get angry about. This ain't it.
I’m not the angry one — you are eager to defend this new standard of evil as bad thoughts rather than bad action, or the absence of doing good (by our 2020 standards) and facts which much be hidden and obscured for some social good. You don’t have to solve everything, but it would be nice if the new bureaucracy wanted to solve anything real (as in physical and tangible). God forbid another architecture institute offer something more than typical hacktivism
The genius of the new bureaucracy— if you don’t build or make anything useful, nobody can cancel you in 50 years due to your bad thoughts and failure to help a disadvantaged group. Best to quietly parrot the current code du jour
"you are eager to defend this new standard of evil as bad thoughts rather than bad action"
Am I, though? Do you even care to know?
Of course you are. I’m criticizing the juxtaposition of cancelling/supressing Johnson with “fundamental reorientation toward inclusion” and you are attacking me (without any real points) therefore you are for the new standard
Fallacious logic aside, I'd care about what you had to say if you stopped using buzzwords. How am I supposed to take you seriously as a VERY INDEPENDENT THINKER if you throw around terminology coined by wannabe internet edge lords? As for me making "real points," I am not going to waste my time making points that you will ignore in lieu of your handy dandy "right wing talking points for idiots" manual.
You seem pretty angry.
“Canceling” is a right wing buzzword? Echoed by none other than Obama. Wake up. The chickens will soon roost in your backyard of knowledge as ideology.
Where did SP use "right wing buzzword"? They are buzzwords, just like SJW, snowflake, etc...
Chemex and random don't believe that people can walk and chew gum at the same time. They're all about unless you solve the the thing I see, instead of dealing with the issue you are choosing to deal with, you're shit.
This phenomenon needs a new name. It is a cousin of tactical Urbanism, that progressive gloss applied between the cracks of McUrbanism. toothless branding, it actually solves its own narratives quite well, PR diversity and social justice theater. There is no grappling with the history of global urban design. Like the Chi Biennale 2019, it’s a series of myopic justice narratives that act as indictments rather than illumination. As for Whiting, do you think for one second if she said “I’m focused on more substantial ways to fix the problems of the past” that she wouldn’t be fired in a week? With the Tactical Anti-Architects, it’s just a way to gain power over mommy and daddy without effort, from former Gehry wannabes, rich Yale grads and urban planning bureaucrats. Heads I win, tails you lose.
Obama is kinda right wing.
Of course Obama and accomplished black and minorities are the most threatening to arrogant symbolic analysts of the elites. They much prefer to fetishize racist whites like Johnson to verify their project — critical race urbanism. Another low-budget venture that won’t cost the elites much
wat
"Why not rename Johnson's work for the people that did all of his work for him?"
That's actually a great idea.
Johnson died FIFTEEN years ago ... 15 ... not 51. Typo. Check your work.
That was an error in the transcription. You can see a copy of the original letter here.
Do any millennials or gen Z even know or care who Phillip Johnson is? Aside from the MoMA/NYC crowd, he really stopped mattering as an influence around 1985 or so.
When any of them start contracting with AIA Gold Medal Winners, we can have that conversation. I wonder how many Proud Bois architects there are now.
well, technically, PJ hasn't been relevant in 51 years, so maybe his career died in 1969, and that's enough for me.
Well, he always was a mediocre architect who rose to power based on his family's wealth and name. Most of his fame was from the self-aggrandizing architectural intelligentsia. Good riddance.
Thanks for the quick correction in your article. JDD
What a strange debate. Not whether Johnson was a dope, but taking the logic that if plantation owners used Classicism, it's racist by extension. Therefore, Johnson as one of the principle promoters of Modernism in America was racist, does that mean that European modernism is racist? Obviously kidding, but this shows how detached this point of view can get from the lived experience of architecture, regardless of style.
He's a big and easy target - famous but only within certain professions, dead, already has a contentious legacy, and his name could be removed without financial penalties.
"Racists used the principles of the Federal Style - I probably have the style wrong - to add legitimacy to their tyranny." I mean, if they used used indigenous architecture, or African architecture, would they be considered more or less racist? They used what they knew, and what they knew is marked by who they were. If PJ was the only architect to use Modernism, then sure, you might have a point, but modern thinking, and architecture did not originate with Johnson.
"but taking the logic that if plantation owners used Classicism, it's racist by extension."
No one is making this case, though. We've been over this in *so many* other threads.
Your right, though it must be repeated because too many people make that case and it is poisonous to the discussion of architecture.
To clarify - I'm not saying no one in this discussion is making that case. I'm saying no one *anywhere* is making that case. I've never heard this idea expressed affirmatively. Only as a strawman to derail other architectural discourse.
Understood. I agree it's a foolish argument from either end, whether our experience is the same or not.
Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're saying. Carry on.
Undoing that legacy–of the field, not only of Johnson–is arduous and necessary
I believe there is too much hysteria due to the pressure of doing the politically correct thing. Pyramids were built under atrocious Pharaohs who enslaved thousand of people, the Colosseum was a theatre to please roman emperors playing life and death with human puppets fighting lions. Shall we erase the names of their commissioners and of the architects who engaged with them? Shall we review entire history of architecture with a new filter? Now that we started, shall we also demolish building built under fascism or other authoritarian regimes? This is so ridiculous.
There's a town in Italy with a big statue of Mussolini in the main square, instead of removing it, the municipality asked artists for an intervention on the object with a new layer, proving so new tools for people to read history and interpret it from a different perspective. I think this could be a lesson on how to approach controversial monuments: https://www.theguardian.com/co...
What's ridiculous is throwing out bullshit comparisons to the pyramids and the romans without even taking the time to understand what you're talking about. You think it's simple because YOU are simple.
What a constructive answer. I guessed you took the time to
You opened your mouth, made some wild comparisons lacking in evidence, then walked away. I'm challenging you to back up your text. Simple as that, and you seem to like simple. If you care about my opinion, back up your text. If not, feel free to move on down the road.
.
(I pressed enter too early) My point was to say that the problem is not solvable with the simplistic approach of cancel culture, by erasing traces in the history, no matter how recent or ancient, of everything we judge controversial. It's a complex issue that cannot be solved with simple solution. That is why I strongly encouraged to read the article I linked, because it put lights on the general issue of approaching controversial monuments. This Mussolini statue is there, right in the middle of the main square, as evident as the PJ name printed on any book, but they didn't cancel it. Through art, they decided to show "the other side of the medal" at the same time. What I am suggesting is that instead of erasing, studying a new way to make this controversial issues be evident is much more educational than erasing all the traces.
First, it's not a statue, it's a bas relief on a building. Second, Mussolini's crimes were against many, but most definitely against Ethiopians. If he erected a statue in Ethiopia, so you think that Ethiopians should keep it up, be forced to deal with Il Duce, because, you know, history is to be dealt with, and statues, or monuments to them are about learning from, and not taking down?
Third, what are books for? History classes?
Could you talk about how Ethiopians living in Italy, as an ethnic minority feel about statues of him, or how they feel about black footballers dealing with racist chants from the crowd?
Why do you believe - after Black Americans telling stories of how they feel to be forced to walk by these things, go to plantations on school trips - that how they feel is less important, than neo-confederates feelings?
.
.
The fact that you use "cancel culture" as a phrase with a straight face tells me a lot about where your thinking is at. If you're such a brilliant student of history you'd know that people have been editing history for as long as they have been fucking.
To b3tadine[sutures]: for example, putting such statue you imagine into a cage wouldn't become a new symbol that represents all layers of history into the right perspective? Emphasising the absurdity of the original action? I'm asking because I don't think history is something to be learnt just on books.
I don't think history is something to be learnt just on statues either, bucko.
To SneakyPete: I admit I used these term without a full knowledge of its meaning, realising it refers to something different from what I am trying to explain, and that I am ignorant on this matter and I need to study more in order to find the right words to express these thoughts, or to consider them under new lights. Thank you all for your inputs.
“ There's a town in Italy with a big statue of Mussolini in the main square, instead of removing it, the municipality asked artists for an intervention on the object with a new layer, proving so new tools for people to read history and interpret it from a different perspective.”. I agree. I already proposed adding ODB fountains to every confederate stature in the US, but no one liked the idea :( “Owwww baby I like it raw....owww baby I like it
raaaawwwww”
yup.
I honestly love the renaming of the house as 9 Ash Street. And I think Dean Whiting's letter is excellent and empathetic. This, especially:
Johnson’s influence runs deep and wide, and across generations, and yet he is also just one figure among the entrenched, paradigmatic racism and white supremacy of architecture. Undoing that legacy–of the field, not only of Johnson–is arduous and necessary, and as a school and community we are committed to seeing it through.
Wish I could stop fighting with bozos on Twitter about this tho. I'm weak-willed LOL.
Johnson wrote his worst in the Social Justice newspaper. That really says it all.
Social Justice is once again resurgent over Truth, which usually loses out. The mob will always follow the latest huckster. At least Johnson had some design and accomplishments behind his power trips. Remember the minute Stalin came to power he immediately expelled the modernists and started building neoclassical monuments to himself. It all goes around and around, another righteous mob to feel superior to the bad people. Johnson would be proud his shadow still looms over new new MoMA. More so than the current regime and weak Deans which will be quickly forgotten
"Johnson wrote his worst in the Social Justice newspaper. That really says it all."
No. It doesn't.
Don’t worry, moronic mob followers are the first to go in the purge. Enjoy
"the purge"
"another righteous mob to feel superior to the bad people"
It's an exaggeration to call yourself a mob, Chemex.
There’s enough dimwits in elite architecture circles to keep the gop in power for another 40 years. Pray foxnews doesn’t find out about these Freud-Marx inspired academics
Future MoMA curators
.
i'd love to hear frank gehrys thoughts on this among others.
.
For those
who don’t get his genius
Let’s just cancel all mean people in history and all of their creations! Exemption: things from before 1492, and things done by people from continents other than Europe.
Mean people suck!
.
Guess what building this is...
EMP
My play, The Glass House, displays Johnson in all his glorious ego racing to finish his house before Mies can build the Farnsworth House. The climatic scene in which they confront each other is based on fact. Mies calls him out and Johnson admits he's a "whore."
This is interesting.
https://www.theatermania.com/new-york-city-theater/reviews/the-glass-house_27389.html
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.