As Annette LeCuyer explains, “Reyner Banham, like Walter Bird, was trained and worked as an aeronautical engineer prior to becoming an architectural historian and chronicler of the avant-garde.” Annette LeCuyer, ETFE: Technology and Design (Basel: Birkhäuser, 2008) 22.
Peter Murray and Tony Gwilliam designed the transparent inflatable for Nova magazine. An image of their inflatable is featured in Reyner Banham’s essay “Monumental Windbags.” See Reyner Banham, “Monumental wind-bags,” in New Society, 18 April 1968, vol. 11, no. 290: 569-70.
Banham, “Monumental wind-bags,” in New Society, 570.
Reyner Banham, “A Home Is Not a House,” Art in America, Vol. 2, 1965: 70-79.
Banham, “A Home Is Not a House,” 71.
It should be noted that New York-based designer Jesse Seegers was hired as the inflatable architecture consultant to carry out the project, which was fabricated out of 20 mm PVC vinyl by Polyfabrics in the Los Angeles area.
Reyner Banham, The Architecture of the Well-Tempered Environment (Chicago: University of Chicago Press; London: The Architectural Press, 1969), 18-28.
Marc-Antoine Laugier, An Essay on Architecture, trans. Wolfgang and Anni Herrmann (Los Angeles: Hennessey & Ingalls, Inc., 1977), 12.
Banham, The Architecture of the Well-Tempered Environment, 21.
Banham, “Monumental wind-bags,” 570.
According to Banham, “But the influence of that bad old school of platonic abstraction is on the wane; the kind of direct-participation, real-space, real-time involvement-aesthetic that is replacing it—epitomized in events like light-sound happenings (which often feature inflatables)—favors this sensitive kind of environment.” Banham, “Monumental wind-bags,” 570.
Ant Farm, Inflatocookbook, 1973.
See Thomas Leslie, “Just what is it That Makes Capsule Homes So Different, So Appealing? Domesticity and the Technological Sublime, 1945 to 1975,” Space and Culture, Vol. 9, No. 2 (May 2006): 138. ➝.
Difficult but Possible Supplement, January 1971 (Menlo Park, CA: Portola Institute). It should be noted that the cover of this supplement is not labeled as “Difficult but Possible,” but rather “Truth, Consequences,” although architectural historians Felicity Scott and Caroline Maniaque-Benton both refer to it as the former. See Felicity D. Scott, Living Archive 7: Ant Farm (Barcelona/New York: Actar, 2008), 81–85; Caroline Maniaque-Benton ed., Whole Earth Field Guide (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2016), 38–40.
“My love-hate relationship with inflatables is in full bloom here,” Brand writes. “They’re trippy, cheap, light, imaginative space, not architecture at all. They’re terrible to work in. The blazing redundant surfaces disorient. One wallows in space. When the sun goes behind a cloud you cease cooking and immediately start freezing. (Ant Farm is working on insulation schemes.) To counteract the cold Fred hung heat lamps from the ceiling which ascended and descended with variation in pillow pressure. Here, during blower adjustment, my light is busy scorching the floor. Environmentally, what an inflatable is best at is protecting you from a gentle rain, not a problem here.” Stewart Brand, “Production in the Desert,” in Difficult but Possible Supplement, January 1971 (Menlo Park, CA: Portola Institute), 42. It should be noted that Brand’s account of the event was similarly captured about six months later in The Last Whole Earth Catalog, June 1971, 107.
Banham, “Monumental wind-bags,” 569. Reprinted in Dessauce, ed., The Inflatable Moment: Pneumatics and Protest in ’68, 31. Requoted in LeCuyer, ETFE: Technology and Design, 22.
Lundy also brought on structural engineers Severud-Elstad-Krueger and mechanical engineers Cosentini Associates as consultants on the project. See LeCuyer, ETFE: Technology and Design, 22. It should be noted that Banham inaccurately states that the AEC Pavilion premiered in 1959 in Rio de Janeiro. See Banham, The Architecture of the Well-Tempered Environment, 270–272.
“The United States knows that if the fearful trend of atomic military build-up can be reversed, this greatest of destructive forces can be developed into a great boon, for the benefit of all mankind. The United States knows that peaceful power from atomic energy is no dream of the future. That capability, already proved, is here—now—today. Who can doubt, if the entire body of the world’s scientists and engineers had adequate amounts of fissionable material with which to test and develop their ideas, that this capability would rapidly be transformed into universal, efficient and economic usage.” President Dwight D. Eisenhower, “Atoms for Peace,” speech delivered to the 470th Plenary Meeting of the United Nations General Assembly, Tuesday, 8 December 1953, 2:45pm. Reprinted in Ira Chernus, Eisenhower’s Atoms for Peace (College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2002), xi–xix.
Alice Buck, “The Atomic Energy Commission” (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, July 1983), 6–7, ➝.
“Yet the president’s proposals for peace were meant fully seriously. He could practice apocalypse management only if he could convince his own country and allied nations to accept this image of peace and to endorse his efforts to attain that peace.” Chernus, 120.
According to Chernus, “The great innovation of ‘Atoms for Peace’ was to offer superpower cooperation as a route not merely to peace and stability, but to national security and, by implication, cold war victory.” Chernus, Eisenhower’s Atoms for Peace, 120.
V.A. Lundy, “Architectural and Sculptural Aspects of Pneumatics,” in Proceedings of the First International Colloquium of Pneumatic Structures (Stuttgart, Germany: University of Stuttgart, 1973), 11.
It should be noted that in various publications, there are several inconsistencies in the account of locations and dates for the touring AEC Pavilion. The information regarding the Latin America tour was taken from a 16-page bi-lingual (English/Spanish) booklet produced by the AEC. United States Atomic Energy Commission, Atoms at Work / Atomos en Accion (Washington D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963), 9.
V.A. Lundy, “Architectural and Sculptural Aspects of Pneumatics,” 11.
V.A. Lundy, “Architectural and Sculptural Aspects of Pneumatics,” 13. As architect and author Annette LeCuyer explains, “This structure was a hybrid of an air-filled and air-supported envelope together with inflated self-supporting external canopies at the ends of the building, where rigid metal frames housed air lock doors.” LeCuyer, ETFE: Technology and Design, 22.
As described in an AEC promotional brochure, “The unusual building provides the ultimate safety for those within in. Anchored to a concrete slab, it will withstand a 70-mile per hour gale or gusts up to 90 miles per hour. It is fireproof and has no seams, columns, or other rigid structural members which might constitute an accident hazard. Because of its compartmented structure, it would not collapse even if its fabric ‘skin’ were torn in one or more places. Even under extreme conditions of envelope damage or pressure loss, the period for complete deflation would be in excess of one-half hour.” United States Atomic Energy Commission, Atoms at Work / Atomos en Accion, 13–14.
V.A. Lundy, “Architectural and Sculptural Aspects of Pneumatics,” 13.
V.A. Lundy, 13.
The original cost of the structure was $99,870, and its extensive exhibits, which Lundy also designed, ran another $70,000. See V.A. Lundy, 13. It should be noted that in his CV, Lundy lists the project as costing $1,000,000. Victor Lundy, CV, eight pages typed, undated. Victor A. Lundy Archive, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.
According to Lundy, this was “1/5 to 1/20th the time required to assemble other building types considered.” V.A. Lundy, 13.
United States Atomic Energy Commission, Atoms at Work / Atomos en Accion, 9.
Ibid., 14.
Ibid.
Banham, “Monumental wind-bags,” 569.
“Besides its durability, it is notable among inflatable structures for its size, complexity and open form on plan. Whereas most air-supported structures tend to be simple domes, or elongations of domical forms that still retain a closed figure in plan, the AEC pavilion is better described as an open-ended vault, or half-tube, deformed to produce two approximately hemispherical spaces joined by a central neck, and entered by means of arched porches, about the same diameter as the neck, at either end. Internally, there is a small inflatable dome to house a model atomic reactor, and sundry rigid, non-inflatable partitions, projection screens, and so forth. The precise distribution of credit for the design between Lundy, Bird and the consulting engineers, is not easy to fix, but the result remains virtually the only air structure to date with any pretensions to architectural sophistication.” Banham, The Architecture of the Well-Tempered Environment, 270–272.
“You name it, someone is blowing it up right now, but it isn’t quite as new as is sometimes made out.” Banham, “Monumental wind-bags,” 569.
For further reading on Frederick William Lanchester’s 1917 patent for a 1917 air supported field hospital, see Roger Dent, Principles of Pneumatic Architecture (New York: Halsted Press Division, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1972), 27–30.
According to Roger Dent, “Despite Lanchester’s failure to realise his proposals, surely he can justifiably be called the originator of pneumatic building construction.” Dent, Principles of Pneumatic Architecture, 30.
As writer and historian Sean Topham explains, “Simple inflatable forms proved to be an effective method of deception during World War II.” Topham adds, “Inflatable technology was then developed by the US Air Force who employed it in the complex realm of enemy detection.” Sean Topham, blowup: Inflatable Art, Architecture and Design (Munich/Berlin/London/New York: Prestel-Verlag, 2002), 41.
Walter Bird, “Air Structures” in Building Research, Volume 9, Number 1, January/March 1972 (Building Research Institute): 6.
Dent, Principles of Pneumatic Architecture, 34–35.
For further information on Walter Bird’s early pneumatic works, see LeCuyer, ETFE: Technology and Design, 21–22.
“From humble beginnings of developing early radomes and rapid deployment command shelters, Bird and his team went on to develop commercial applications in bulk storage and removable sports facility covers. As a result, in 1957, the Buffalo, N.Y., home of company founder Walter Bird was pictured on the front cover of LIFE Magazine. It featured an air-supported pool enclosure in winter, as a glimpse toward life in the future!” ➝.
Bird, “Air Structures,” 7.
As New York Times reporter John M. Lee explained in 1964, “Owens-Corning Fiberglass estimates that about a million pounds of glass fiber are employed in about two dozen fair pavilions. The material is used in everything from telephone booths to airborne roofs at the Brass Rail refreshment centers.” Importantly, Lee adds, “The opportunity for the use of plastics and synthetic fibers at the fair came when New York City waived the 20-year longevity requirement of the building code for fair structures.” John M. Lee, “Plastics Abound in Fair Buildings: Industry seeks to Capitalize on Construction Showcase,” in New York Times, April 26, 1964.
As Lundy explains, “Surrounded by purposeful and expensive structure executed in steel and concrete which can stand forever and which had larger budgets, I think this demonstrates how it is possible through twentieth century technology to create huge volumes of architectural form and space through relatively simple and inexpensive means.” Victor A. Lundy, “Refreshments Complexes for the Brass Rail, New York World’s Fair, 1964-65.” Victor A. Lundy Archive, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.
Lundy repeatedly refers to the World’s Fair pavilions as “Air Flowers,” whereas in some instances they are called “Space Flowers.”
According to Lundy, “The entire site of 60 x 100 feet is roofed over with an interesting canopy which acts as a white podium for the white air sculpture, which is also of white fiberglass. It rises and is attached to the central mast which supports the air structure and has a large cutout in the center allowing a view of the air structure from below.” Victor A. Lundy, “Refreshments Complexes for the Brass Rail, New York World’s Fair, 1964-65.” A three-paged typed statement by the architect describing the Brass Rail project. Victor A. Lundy Archive, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.
According to Lundy, “One of the realities of this problem was that these Refreshment Centers are scattered at random throughout the Fairgrounds. It seemed like an excellent opportunity, with the great variety of forms and shapes and solutions at the New York World’s Fair, to use the fact that there are many of these units, to full advantage as a unifying recurring visual image of the Fair as a whole. The brave, sassy shape of the air structure is intended simply as an abstract, visual image that people will identify readily through repetition throughout the Fair. It was intended in a sense as ‘architectural foliage.’ It was purposely made to a dimension big enough to be seen.” Victor A. Lundy, “Refreshments Complexes for the Brass Rail, New York World’s Fair, 1964-65.” Victor A. Lundy Archive, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.
As Lundy explains, “There seem to be endless possibilities for taking advantage of combinations of materials, opacity, translucency, transparency of fabrics, patterns of stitching and joints; effects through these combinations, of natural light coming through in controlled ways by day; and the reverse effect by night.” Lundy, “Architectural and Sculptural Aspects of Pneumatics,” 16.
Victor Lundy, sketch for the Brass Rail Pavilion, dated March 9, 1963. Victor A. Lundy Archive, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.
For further insight into Balug and Hale’s recent pneumatic exhibition at the BAC in Boston, see Antonio Furgiuele’s review in the Journal of Architectural Education (JAE), ➝.
“In this sense, pneumatic structures offer great possibilities in the hands of creative architects and engineers to make new forms of wonder and possibility that are truly of our time. Pneumatic structures are of this age and into the future.” V.A. Lundy, “Architectural and Sculptural Aspects of Pneumatics,” 11.
V.A. Lundy, 11.