Welcome to the Glass Age

102 Typology dictates both about constructed space and human interaction with space, if typology can be reduced to a list or diagrammatic distribution of spaces, it is meaningful only with human action on the space. Since glass architecture doesn’t have a single theoretical root, it also doesn’t have a single typological origin, opening the possibility to parallel typological developments. While it is straightforward with the arcades of Paris —because they can be traced as an origin point for the typological sequence of commercial galleries, department stores and even shopping centers—, the Crystal Palace, being the first exhibition palace, is typologically in between two distinct functions and spatial dimensions. As it’s possible to trace back the structure of glass and iron to the greenhouse and the later to stone and glass orangeries of royal palaces, from the Crystal Palace onwards there is a development of typologies focused on human interchange such as other exhibition palaces, modern expositive pavilions and convention centers. Modern Pavilions are another key typology to understand the development of glass architecture, many were constructed both as synthesis of an ideal and a proof of concept for architecture. All of them were built as temporary structures where architects experimented with new construction techniques and materials. Bruno Taut’s Glass Pavilion, Le Corbusier’s L’Esprit Nouveau Pavilion and Mies van der Rohe’s Barcelona Pavilion are some of the most iconic examples that explored glass in relation to architecture; but specially with Le Corbusier and Mies van der Rohe it is possible to note a development of a language of glass architecture expressed in a synthetic manner on their pavilions. The same can be said of Oscar Niemeyer and Lucio Costa’s New York Pavilion for the 1939 World’s Fair in the context of Brazilian Figure 6.7. Glass house’s bookshelves designed by Lina Bo Bardi. Source: Instituto Bardi.