Trapped In A Glass House No Stones To Throw

Trapped in a Glass House: No Stones to ThrowA Topical Study

Claire Marie ShowalterApril 2010Oxford, Ohio

A thesis submitted to the Miami University Honors Program in ful-fillment of the requirements for University Honors with Distinction

Trapped in a Glass House: No Stones to ThrowA Topical StudyClaire Marie Showalter

Approved by:

, Advisor

, Reader

, Reader

Approved by:

, Director

Mr. John Humphries

Mr. Karl Wallick

Mr. Lucas Goldbach

University Honors Program

Throughout architectural history, materials have carried both a meaning and a story. While perhaps not always

consciously chosen for these distinct purposes, much information can be drawn from the selection and application

of materials in architecture. Oftentimes materials may have a great deal to do with the region of the construc-

tion and what is available to builders, illustrated in such places as Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello, using the local

red clay for its bricks. Still, materials have come to possess a power of communication, and the method of their

application becomes an interesting point of study. For example, while stone was once used structurally and glass

as a decoration, glass can now serve in a structural capacity and stone is more often than not simply a cladding

attached to another structural system. Focusing on this comparison, this particular study will concentrate on the

historical and contemporary meanings of stone and glass, how these meanings have or have not changed, and why

this is the case.

AbstractTrapped in a Glass House: No Stones to Throw

Claire Marie Showalter

By studying the history of both stone and glass, the typology of buildings in which they are generally used as a main

or symbolic material, and how societies have changed, evolved, or remained constant, a thorough background will

be assembled from which to begin interpreting this intertwined history. Two folded timelines consist of the histori-

cal and factual background of each material and their uses and meanings, as well as a running thought process and

commentary illustrated through text and original drawings. The text will then be summarized through a reflective

conclusive essay and an explanation of formatting choices.

A battle begins.

At what point does a material cease to be a thing and transcend through time and space to incur a meaning; to become a represen-

tative force rather than a mere piece of earth?

A representative force. A piece of earth. Stone.

Stone...is incompressible, incorruptible and resists time.

1a. Stone in Rauma, Finland. Claire Showalter, 2009.

1b. Composition 1. Claire Showalter 2010.

These rocks…waiting to be split, ripped, pounded, reborn; wait-ing for the shape my hands will give them…”

Ayn Rand The Fountainhead

Stone Structures have existed since the first nomadic cultures stopped and put down roots. Since this time, one meaning of stone has been that of per-manence. To build in stone is to harness the earth to create a shelter, a place. It is to mimic mountains, to use the same method as the earth to bridge the realm of terrestrial and the realm of the sky. Carving the earth, shaping the rock on which we all live, creating place.

Stone resists time, yet shows age. It is honest about days, seasons, years passing. It reflects its environment, chang-es with light, with mois-ture. A morphing shield.

2a. New Mexico. Claire Showalter, 2008.

2b. Dernie, David. New Stone Architecture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print. Pg 9.

2c. Rand, Ayn, and Leonard Peikoff. The Fountainhead. New York: Signet, 1993. Print.

2d. Composition 2. Claire Showalter, 2010.

Above Earth

Below Earth

When stone is used as a structural component, it often comes from local sources. Thus, there is usually a strong sense of lo-cal character and identity in true stone structures, as a piece of local earth is brought above the surface.

3a. Rock of Ages # 59, Abandoned Section, Adam-Pirie Quarry, Barre, Vermont, 1991. Burtynsky, Edward. “Quarries.” Edward Burtynsky [ Photographic Works ]. <http://www.edwardburtynsky.com/>.

3b. Dernie, David. New Stone Architecture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print. Pg. 38.

3c. Composition 3. Claire Showalter, 2010.

Just as stone varies with its place of origin, various stone types carry unique feelings and meanings. For instance, ig-neous rocks such as granite are a flexible type, used in in-teriors and on exteriors and is found in a vast spectrum of colors. Sedimentary stones like limestone are heavily used as dimensional stones, especially in many formal institu-tional structures. Marble speaks of wealth, power, and purity, whereas slate is considered a more commonplace stone, though both are metamorphic.

The same material reading differently based on appearance and structure. Stone or Man?

4a. Stone in Rauma 2. Claire Showalter, 2009.

4b. Dernie, David. New Stone Architecture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print. Pg 39-41.


Architecture acting as enforcer through materiality and massing.

Stone structures depend on massiveness to ensure their stability.

Belief systems depend on massive quantities of followers to ensure their stability.

5a. Tower of London. Claire Showalter, 2009.

5b. Composition 5. Claire Showalter, 2010.

Inflexibility. Unchanging.

Throughout history, religion, government, and academia have been closely linked, encompassing most means of organizing and educating societiy--exuding a formidable prescence in human life. To communicate this strength and power, these bodies often turned to the use of stone, a built manifestation of the permanent, dominant nature of these institutions.

A parallel between stone construction and built en-vironments of faith. Why stone? Stone means protec-tion, shielding from external forces. It can create a safe haven. Various religious sec-tors have made similar claims of their faith throughout his-tory, thus creating a tight re-lationship.

How does this relate to the tradition of using stone in govern-mental and academic structures? Or is there a connection?

This materiality choice was made consciously to convey these intentions, the immov-ability and stability of these fixtures in society. However, such a choice also has other connotations.

6a. Blaser, Werner. Eduardo Souto de Moura Stein, Element, Stone. Basel: Birkha, 2003. Print. Pg. 33.


An element of the earth to combat natural forces: stone buttressing.

Stone buried deep in the earth, creating the solid on which life occurs. Transcending to the surface, supporting itself against the forces of the heavens. Delving down, reaching high.

7a. Dernie, David. New Stone Architecture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print. Pg. 14.

7b. Buttress in Dublin. Claire Showalter 2010.

7c. Rock of Ages # 39, Active Section, E.L. Smith Quarry, Barre, Vermont, 1991. Burtynsky, Edward. “Quarries.” Edward Burtynsky [ Photographic Works ]. <http://www.edwardburtynsky.com/>.


Buildings where stone is used as a structural com-ponent are expressive of the loads being carried to the earth. Columns en-large as the load increas-es at the base, buttresses visually combat the lat-eral forces at work on vertical elements. There is an honesty and evident visual logic to these sys-tems.

Is truth in vision? Or is truth in execution, in ac-tion, in tangibility? Vision: people desire to see in or-der to believe, requiring transparency. However, a visual representation of natural forces at work is perhaps a more convinc-ing indicator of a straight-forward system. Is impor-tance in seeing through a structure [building/mate-rial/government/institu-tion] or in understanding its complexities on the surface?

8a. Blaser, Werner. Eduardo Souto de Moura Stein, Element, Stone. Basel: Birkha, 2003. Print. Pg. 27.

8b. L’école de Beaux Arts of Paris. Claire Showalter 2010.

Stone possesses the power to last over time. Though this existence does not go unrepresented in a visual sense, and can ultimately lead to the destruction of the struc-ture after much exposure and wear, stone can live almost eternally in a built environment through reuse. Once the life of the building is over, the stone material can be used again eitherin a new construction or in a ground fill capacity.

Building on earth or building on stone.

9a. Dernie, David. New Stone Architecture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print. Pg. 39.

9b. Rock Foundations in Tallinn. Claire Showalter, 2009.


What is real and what is false become more difficult to determine.

Applied stone facade--act-ing as a curtain of stone on a structure compos-ted of another material. Very similar in theory to the widespread use of the glass curtain wall, meant to give the appearance of a glass building with-out actually manipulating glass to its full structural potential.

10a. Ojeda, Oscar Riera, Mark Pasnik, and Photography By Paul Warchol. Architecture in Detail Materials (Architecture in Detail). New York: Rockport, 2005. Print. Pg. 75.

10b. Dernie, David. New Stone Architecture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print. Pg. 58.


Only the image of stonework is translated into the cladding of today; a suggestion, an echo of the qualities of the truth in stone.

The Chapel of Santa Maria built by Mario Botta in Switzerland stands as an example of just such deceit. The chapel appears to be a traditional load-bearing stone structure, however, this is merely an exterior application, a handful of inches to imply the weight and unit structure of stone, masking the expanse of concrete found beneath. If actually built of stone, the chapel could stand as an extension of the striking earthen power of the mountain from which it projects. Instead, it stands as an addition of man, yet pretends otherwise.

11a + c. Dernie, David. New Stone Architecture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print. Pg. 17.

11b + d. Dernie, David. New Stone Architecture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print. Pg. 16.

11e. Dernie, David. New Stone Architecture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print. Pg. 63.

11f. Composition 10. Claire Showalter, 2010.

Cologne_Germany Wallraf-Richartz Museum_O M Ungers

Dichotomy between old and new, truthful and masking. The placement of a modern museum directly adjacent to the ruins of a gothic church exac-erbates the differences between the real structural quality of the gothic church as it crumbles after centuries of existence and the clean, hard lines and unstructural quality of the outter stone appearance of the museum.

There is an expressive strength in the fly-ing buttresses of the cathedral clearly indi-cate the structural na-ture of the stone. The rough surface plays with shadow and illu-mintation, creating a dynamic surface con-dition.

The museum hides its true structure behind a façade of stone. The flush joints and L-shaped corners give the appearance of a uniform solid in plane, yet lacking the section necessary to truely be of stone, to grow from the earth. This surface draws attention to the contents rather than the building itself, a difference in program-matic importances.

12a + b. Dernie, David. New Stone Architecture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print. Pg. 86.


12d. Dernie, David. New Stone Architecture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print. Pg. 87.

Enter: glass.SiO2

Glass: a random molecular structure of liquids. Appears as lucid, transparent solid. Stable unpredictability. A transparent rock.

Glass becomes a rock for the Modern Age, bringing stability and

clarity to human environments.

A modern society desires clarity,

honesty, peace.

What can be done with one substance must never be done with another. No two materials are alike. No two sites on earth are alike. No two buildings have the same purpose.

Ayn Rand The Fountainhead

13a. Wigginton, Michael. Glass in architecture. London: Phaidon, 1996. Print. Pg. 25.

13b. Bell, Victoria Ballard, and Patrick Rand. Materials for Design. New York: Princeton Architectural, 2006. Print. Pg. 13.

13c. Saint Chapelle of Paris. Claire Showalter, 2009.

Glass, the conun-drum. Resembling crystals through its rigid nature, yet also sharing the struc-ture of a liquid in its random molecular arrangement.

Glass, the riddle. Carrying an implied clarity due to its generally transparent nature, yet maintaining the ability to transform and distort what passes through its surface. Questioning the tangibil-ity and realness of that which is on the other side.

Layers. Open. Transmitting. Communicating. Concealing.

14a. Deceptive Glass in Tallinn. Claire Showalter, 2009.



hard/brittle crystal/liquid solid/transparent transmit/filter fragile/resiliant

Though glass is not as ancient and directly associated with the earth as stone, the mate-rial has an extensive history dating back five thousand years to Eastern Mesopotamia.

A new society creates new architectural oppor-tunities. Glass becomes a staple for modern pro-grams such as exhibit halls and public trans-portation stations. Was there a place for these programs in earlier his-tory? How would they have been different as a stone piece? A transport-ing/transforming society.

15a + b. Wigginton, Michael. Glass in Architecture. London: Phaidon, 1996. Print. Pg. 12-13.

15c. Glass roof in Paris. Claire Showalter, 2009.


The Church saw an opportunity to spread its message through the implementation of glass in its spaces. With glass, they could tell a visual tale to their typically illiterate fol-lowers. These colorful illuminated stories could be said to have acted as some of the first advertisements, promoting that found within the walls of Medieval and Gothic ca-thedrals. This tradition of glass in religious architecture to filter light to create a spiri-tual atmosphere and elaborate on the ideas of the institution continues to this day with such examples as Allmann Sattler Wappner Architekten’s Church of the Sacred Heart in Munich, Germany.

Glass as Color as Light as Information as Messenger.

16a. Church Window in Dublin. Claire Showalter, 2009.


16c. Elkadi, Hisham. Cultures of Glass Architecture (Design and the Built Environment). Grand Rapids: Ashgate, 2006. Print. Pg. 4.


A blank plane. A neutral platform. (cite) The Identity of a New Society: clean, mod-ern, sleek, open, hon-est, straightforward, unobstructing, peace-ful, universal, strength in directness.

Architects shift from an ar-chitecture focused on creat-ing penetrated enclosures to one of intended total under-standability and openness.

Openings versus Openness.

One can maintain protection from weather and outside elements while creating a new opportunity for views out and in, a less private but more liberated society.

A more liberated society?

note: religious build-ings were among the first to implement glazing in their open-ings to future com-municate the ideals of the institution. Gov-ernmental structures soon followed suit.

Authoritative architec-ture utilizing stone...

now utilizing glass.

openness

opening

16a. Church Window in Dublin. Claire Showalter, 2009.


16c. Elkadi, Hisham. Cultures of Glass Architecture (Design and the Built Environment). Grand Rapids: Ashgate, 2006. Print. Pg. 4.


Structural application of glass arrives. 19th century: Gustave Falconnier of France introduces glass bricks with limited load-bearing capacities for a new application of glass in structure.

Glass becomes a preferred material among Modern-ists. Le Corbusier, Mies Van der Rohe, Owens, Saarinen, employing glass as a representation of a new society. A material without a local or cultural identity.

Clean (washing our hands of our past)Modern (advancing technologies)Sleek (smoothing the edges)Open (yet still sealed)Honest (total exposure.)Straightforward (laying it all out)Unobstructing (nothing to hide)Peaceful (passive existence)

Universal (little variation by locale)

Does glass resist time? Or does it merely conceal its age, less marked on its surface by life.

A lack of reference to its past. Perhaps modern society pre-fers not to reference its past.

17a. “The Glass House | Modern Home Survey.” The Philip Johnson Glass House. Web. <http://philipjohnsonglasshouse.org/preservationatwork/modernhomesurvey/>.

17b + c. Bell, Victoria Ballard, and Patrick Rand. Materials for Design. New York: Princeton Architectural, 2006. Print. Pg. 14.


Is glass honest? The idea that a transparent mate-rial acts as a structural solid may indicate otherwise. Glass is often used to simulate nothing at all, thus nothing is acting as the structure and a structure is floating. Anti-gravity architecture? Is this honest? Is modern honest?

Glass is applied not only to religious and govermental buildings. It comes to the modern scene with a set of buildings with new purposes and pro-grams such as exhi-bition halls [open-ing information] and transportation stations [opening the world]. Expan-sive use of glass creates a monu-mental quality in these structures, communicating the importance and widespread reach of their contents.

18a. Non-transparency in London. Claire Showalter, 2009.

18b. Wigginton, Michael. Glass in Architecture. London: Phaidon, 1996. Print. Pg. 12-13.


Totally open, yet sealed. An Invisible Barrier creating unseen walls. An indication of a Modern Society?

Glass transforming from a role as shield to that of manipulator.

Acting as an example of a struc-ture truly of glass, the experi-mental Glass Dome by Lucio Blandini in Stuttgart, Germany is constructed by gluing spherical glass panes together for a frame-less structural glass shell. The project is an exploration into the structural possibilities of glass as an element supporting the entire building to achieve a more mini-mal built form.

19a. “Glass Dome by Lucio Blandini, University of Stuttgart.” The Buckminster Fuller Institute. Web. <http://www.bfi.org/our_programs/bfi_community/general_content/glass_dome_by_lucio_blandini_uni-

versity_of_stuttgart>.

19b. Wigginton, Michael. Glass in Architecture. London: Phaidon, 1996. Print. Pg. 67.

Though the glass facade of Snohetta’s Oslo Opera House is not structural in that it supports the main building loads, it is self-supporting through the integration of a system of laminated glass fins and steel cables.

Is self-supporting enough? In a sense, self-supporting is still a form of struc-tural responsibility, but does not take on the same intense roles that much true stone construction does.

20a + b. Oslo 1 and 2. Claire Showalter, 2009.

20c. “Oslo Opera House / Snohetta | ArchDaily.” ArchDaily | Broadcasting Architecture Worldwide. Web. <http://www.archdaily.com/440/oslo-opera-house-snohetta/>.


Exuding a quality of lightness and structural integrity, the cantilevered glass canopy designed by Dewhurst Macfar-lane and Partners at the Tokyo International Forum stands as an example of glass acting as its own structural compo-nent. Four component beams consisting of laminated glass and acrylic are pinned in two places to create an arch form. These all connect to a main supporting stainless steel beam with V-shaped stainless steel brackets.

Acrylic? Assisting supposed glass structure, acting as glass?

Deceiving the eye, the mixing of materials with similar visual qualities to com-pensate for something lacking. A case of clarity of form or false pretenses?

21a + b + c. “Glass Breaking New Boundaries.” Glass Stairs, Toughened Glass, Architectural Metalwork, Glass Processors - Firman Glass, Essex, UK. Web. <http://www.firmanglass.com/breaking.html>.


A different, perhaps more truthfully struc-tural glass application is utilized by REX ar-chitects for the Vakko Fashion Center in Ins-tanbul, Turkey. In this case, sheets of glass are heated to the point at which the solid glass becomes more mallea-ble. It then “slumped” into a formwork that created an X shape in the sheet. This X not only makes for a more animated facade treat-ment, but transforms the glass from simply a surface material of enclosure to an active structural component.

glass acts structurally as a more pure material/no mullions or cables required

reduced thickness/increased strength

Centralizing forces: structurally/actively

22a + b + c. “VAKKO FASHION CENTER AND POWER MEDIA CENTER.” REX – Architecture PC. Web. <http://www.rex-ny.com/work/vakko-fashion-center/>.


As it turns out, there is no particular inherent honesty in either material. Instead, it is the manner in which man uses the physical quali-ties of glass and stone to represent his ideas, his propoganda, or his purposes that creates meaning. It has been shown here that both stone and glass, though standing in apparent stark contrast, can cross boundaries and im-ply meaning opposing that which is intutitive. Thus, it is not an internal property but a pro-jected image and matter of implementation that prescribes such characteristics.

It is present/It is absent.Materiality? or Idea?

23a. La Défense. Claire Showalter 2009.


In conclusion of this investigation, it has been determined that materials are not borne of the earth carrying within

them any kind of meaning or message. Instead, it is a construct of humankind to interpret and apply these mean-

ings upon evaluation of terms such as physical properties and applications. This assertation is determined after

accumulating and evaluating the various meanings and perceptions associated with both stone and glass, seem-

ingly opposing materials. It was found that both materials have the ability to carry contradictory meanings and can

represent similar ideals, thus the logic of inherent meanings loses ground.

An interesting follow up topic may be questioning why society applies the meanings that it does to certain materi-

als. Are such construed meanings derived purely from the physical properties of the material and its source, or are

historical experieneces and other issues a factor? It may even be pertinent to investigate why people feel the need

to find meaning in their surrounding spaces, if this is even a conscious choice. Does man feel or apply a meaning

to raw materials still in the earth, or are these sensed as part of a natural element, devoid of extraneous connota-

tions? Another possible vein of related study would be to compare and contrast the meanings and uses of stone

and concrete throughout history--two very similar and related materials that still stand in juxtaposition to one

another. This could very well be the first installment in a series of material studies, resulting in comparative topic

investigations and interpretations

Final Comments

If pressed to make a final assessment of the relationship between stone and glass, it would seem to be that though

glass is perceived to be a material of honesty, especially when used structurally, because of its transparent nature,

it may be more arguable that stone as a structural application (as opposed to its veneer applications) that is more

truthful, as stone can support not only itself but other structural members and ennunciates its loads on the in-

terior and exterior as walls thicken and buttresses appear. One can actually follow the path of a force through a

stone structure somewhat easily due to its very honest and open nature in this sense, whereas glass becomes a

somewhat more ambiguous.

Overall, the project was a successful venture into a comparative topic study. As is generally the case with such

endeavors, one is left with more questions than answers. However, this only opens the opportunity for more study

in a variety of areas. As this project was an extension of a tangent from a previous Summer Scholar’s experience, it

seemed only natural that it would follow suit and become a more thought-provoking process than one that gathers

tangible, final results.

When initially commencing this project, I felt that I could not simply write a lengthy, more insightful paper. I knew I could write a paper; the main objective in that scenario was to learn how to go so in-depth into a single topic and refrain from redundancy. I discovered an interest in learning to integrate images and text and to represent ideas in a concrete drawing and felt that this could present an unusual and exciting undertaking. Throughout my under-graduate experience, I have written about visual representations and transformed simple two-dimensional pieces into three-dimensional spaces. However, I had not greatly explored abstract drawing as a means of representation itself. To further this idea, I undertook integrating these with text, sometimes more clearly integrated than in oth-ers where it is perhaps only the idea and nothing physical uniting each entity.

Once this idea was settled upon, I had to decide upon a communicative strategy for organizing a more stream-of-consciousness narrative and integrated, as opposed to auxillary, visual elements. Though at first hesitant to take a more unconventional approach through a less formal, standard prose for the text, it became clear that this method best suited the discovery-oriented organization and illustrated a way to better integrate the text as a visual itself. Everything included had to be adapted to meet the standards introduced to maintain a visually cohesive docu-ment. This meant that not only drawings were representing ideas found within the explored topics and text, but photos, cropping and editing of photos, vocabulary, and even the formation of text and arrangement on the page were important factors to the communicative and culminating success of the document as a whole.

The first question at hand was how to structure the project in a standard layout form. Many typical solutions

seemed too unilateral and lacked a flow to them--a simple left-to-right, top-to-bottom set-up was too confined and

disjointed. Initially, I struggled to find a coherent method that complimented the unfolding of history, ideas, and

social constructs until I began to use this idea of unfolding in a more literal sense as an organizational mechanism.

As the project developed into two parts, one as a factual, history based segment and one as a stream of associ-

ated thoughts and constructed meanings, I also began assembling my final product in a bi-linear fashion. The final

result, a dual timeline unfolding in two directions to delineate information between opposing materials , allows for

a distinction between thought processes and flows freely in a logical manner, yet imposes a structure that unites

them both to form a more singular train of thought and set of conclusions.

As a next step in a following project with a similar process, I would consider creating physical unfolding branches

of thought from the main text. Oftentimes in a large, complex thought process, new information or connected

ideas are thrown to the side in pursuit of the main objective. However, these tangents have the potential to be

extremely valuable lines of thought to consider and can lead to even more exciting and unexpected ends, thus

validating a place in the final presented document. Such an alternative route physical unfolding from a main body

of text provides the reader with the option to pursue another train of thought without forcing such an issue. Per-

haps an even more interesting possibility is one in which readers can contribute their own knowledge or thoughts

in a physical web centered around a single origin, as a means of sharing and connecting on a topic. However many

unusual options this presents, I strongly sense that this project is only the beginning of a series of explorations

into unique formatting methods that may themselves communicate with their content in a stronger way than the

traditional paper format that is so dominate as to suggest no other means of relaying a fully developed series of

information.

Process Reflection

Works Referenced

Bell, Victoria Ballard, and Patrick Rand. Materials for Design. New York: Princeton Architectural, 2006. Print.

Beylerian, George M. Material ConneXion the global resource of new and innovative materials for architects, art-ists, and designers. Hoboken, N.J: J. Wiley, 2005. Print.

Blaser, Werner. Eduardo Souto de Moura Stein, Element, Stone. Basel: Birkha, 2003. Print.

Burtynsky, Edward. “Quarries.” Edward Burtynsky [ Photographic Works ]. <http://www.edwardburtynsky.com/>.

Dernie, David. New Stone Architecture. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print.

Ojeda, Oscar Riera, Mark Pasnik, and Photography By Paul Warchol. Architecture in Detail Materials (Architecture in Detail). New York: Rockport, 2005. Print.

Elkadi, Hisham. Cultures of Glass Architecture (Design and the Built Environment). Grand Rapids: Ashgate, 2006. Print.

Engineered transparency the technical, visual, and spatial effects of glass. New York: Princeton Architectural, 2008. Print.

“Glass Breaking New Boundaries.” Glass Stairs, Toughened Glass, Architectural Metalwork, Glass Processors - Fir-man Glass, Essex, UK. Web. <http://www.firmanglass.com/breaking.html>.

“Glass Dome by Lucio Blandini, University of Stuttgart.” The Buckminster Fuller Institute. Web. <http://www.bfi.org/our_programs/bfi_community/general_content/glass_dome_by_lucio_blandini_university_of_stuttgart>.

Holzman, Malcolm. Stonework designing with stone. Mulgrave, Victoria: Images Pub. Group, 2001. Print.

Lokko, Lesley Naa Norle. White Papers, Black Marks: Architecture, Race, Culture. Minneapolis: University of Min-nesota, 2000. Print.

“Oslo Opera House / Snohetta | ArchDaily.” ArchDaily | Broadcasting Architecture Worldwide. Web. <http://www.archdaily.com/440/oslo-opera-house-snohetta/>.

Rand, Ayn, and Leonard Peikoff. The Fountainhead. New York: Signet, 1993. Print.

“The Glass House | Modern Home Survey.” The Philip Johnson Glass House. Web. <http://philipjohnsonglass-house.org/preservationatwork/modernhomesurvey/>.

Tomasula, Steve. VAS: an Opera in Flatland : a Novel. Chicago: University of Chicago, 2004. Print.

Tuukkanen, Pirkko, ed. Matter and Mind in Architecture. Hämeenlinna Finland: Kirjapaino Karisto, 2000. Print.

“VAKKO FASHION CENTER AND POWER MEDIA CENTER.” REX – Architecture PC. Web. <http://www.rex-ny.com/work/vakko-fashion-center/>.

Wigginton, Michael. Glass in architecture. London: Phaidon, 1996. Print.

Trapped In A Glass House No Stones To Throw

Business

Transcript of Trapped In A Glass House No Stones To Throw