Archispeak Episode #378: "Misalignments of Rigor"

Hosts: Evan Troxel & Cormac Phalen
Date: September 16, 2025

Overview

In this episode, Evan and Cormac explore the complexities—and pitfalls—of working on additions to significant architectural landmarks. Through personal field experiences, the hosts discuss why alignments and detailing matter, what can go wrong when rigor is ignored, and reflect on how architects learn from both successes and failures in the built environment. This candid episode blends on-site observations, technical insight, and tales of architectural discovery, offering a nuanced look into the art (and frustration) of adapting revered buildings.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Tectonic Lodge and the Field Trip to a Louis Kahn Building

[00:24–02:28]

• Cormac describes joining a small group called the "Tectonic Lodge," an informal gathering of architects focused on visiting and experiencing notable buildings firsthand.
• The group planned a trip to the Louis Kahn-designed building in Fort Wayne, Indiana, only to discover upon arrival it was closed for renovations despite the website indicating otherwise.
• Cormac: "Both of us looked ahead of time to make sure it was open... Get there. Guess what? It wasn’t." [01:54]

2. The Dilemma of Adding to Architectural Masterpieces

[03:16–07:01]

• The hosts contemplate the immense pressure and responsibility of designing an addition to an iconic building.
• Evan raises the question: "Could you imagine the pressure of doing an addition to a Kahn building? Would you even say yes to a project like that?" [03:16]
• Cormac reflects on seeing additions to both Kahn and Breuer buildings, noting missed opportunities in aligning with the rigor and intentions of the original designs.

Notable Observations:

• The new addition appeared haphazard and misaligned, failing to respect key elements like material transitions, geometry, and door sizes.
• Cormac: "There were so many misalignments with the... rigor of what Kahn does... The addition looks so haphazard." [06:04]
• The hosts debate whether design compromises were due to value engineering, committee decisions, or possibly even client indifference.

3. Preservation, Contrast, and Context in Architectural Additions

[07:07–14:24]

• The conversation shifts to the philosophy of architectural preservation—should additions strictly preserve the original language, or contrast intentionally and honestly?
• Cormac: "There's a difference between preservation and recreation... If you look at the standards, they tell a different story." [13:04]
• They discuss official guidelines and committees that typically regulate changes to historic buildings.
• Evan shares his own project experience where additions were purposefully contrasting, responding to user dissatisfaction with the original William Pereira campus buildings.
• The importance of designing "of your own time" vs. creating visual recreations is debated.

4. Case Study Comparisons: Gehry and SANAA

[14:24–27:22]

• On the return trip, Cormac visits the Frank Gehry addition to the Toledo Art Museum. He expresses unexpected admiration for the project, especially the detailing and weathering of its unusual matte metal cladding.
• Cormac: "Of all of the Gehry buildings that I have seen throughout my life... this is one of my favorites." [14:24]
• Detailing praise: unlike the problematic Stata Center (MIT), the Toledo building’s joints and edges kept water out, even in a downpour, which impressed both hosts.
• The contextual relationship of Gehry’s design with the classical museum provided a grounded example of contrast done well: "It looks a lot like... they were excavating to do an addition... and found this big titanium or unearthed this thing and said, well, it’s too big for us to move..." [17:08]
• The hosts briefly cover Gehry’s design development on the Disney Concert Hall and its variations of success.

5. SANAA’s Glass Museum: Detailing Innovation and Failures

[23:19–30:22]

• Across from Gehry’s building, Cormac visits the SANAA-designed glass Museum of Glass, lauding its innovative double-glass wall and acoustic qualities.
• He observes failures in parapet and flashing details, causing visible swelling and misalignment—fuel for pondering how architects try to innovate and invent new details, sometimes successfully, sometimes not.
• Cormac: "They made this detail up. This was a one-off... They’re going to improve that detail because they saw, oh, this failed." [29:27]

6. Learning from Failures: Research, Mock-ups, and Design Development

[30:22–33:47]

• The need for full-scale testing, R&D, and learning from previous attempts before committing to never-before-done details is emphasized.
• Evan challenges the practicalities of doing meaningful mock-ups early in design development and the reality of time and resource constraints.
• Cormac shares a rare success story in which a custom detail—developed with a manufacturer—has lasted the test of time.

7. Coordination, Rigor, and the "Invisible" Details

[36:52–41:28]

• In discussing his own ongoing Baltimore project, Cormac laments how details like wall devices and fixtures, if not perfectly coordinated, can create painful visual misalignments—and clients always notice.
• Evan: "Are these things just too small to show up in the model? Is that the deal?" [37:49]
• Both reflect on their experiences with subcontractors who sometimes neglect the bigger aesthetic picture, or simply follow instructions that lack holistic coordination.

Notable Quotes & Moments

• Cormac, on the failed addition:
  "The addition looks so haphazard... There's such a rigor to what Kahn does, that everything about that rigor... was 100% ignored." [06:04–11:07]

• Evan, on designing in opposition:
  "Everything we did was in direct opposite response... It was like, here's what we don't like. The new thing will be the opposite of that." [12:14]

• Cormac, on Gehry's Toledo addition:
  "This one, it's interesting because ... the rain was rolling over. And what was interesting about it is... the water would rush down one thing and then it would rush down the face of it, create... man made waterfalls..." [18:02–19:04]

• Cormac, on learning from failures:
  "They made this detail up. This was a one-off. No one's ever done this detail for... they're going to improve that detail because they saw, oh, this failed. What could we do better?" [29:27]

• Cormac, on device placement mishaps:
  "When you miss something, it is seen. It hurts." [38:22]

Timestamps for Important Segments

| Time | Segment | |-----------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 00:24 | Tectonic Lodge and field trip to Kahn building | | 03:16 | Pressure and challenges of adding to landmark works | | 06:04 | Observations on misalignments and lack of rigor in an addition | | 13:04 | Preservation vs. recreation; "building of your time" | | 14:24 | Visiting the Gehry addition—unexpectedly positive takeaways | | 17:31 | Unique qualities and landscape approach of Gehry's museum design | | 23:19 | SANAA’s glass Museum—detailing, innovation, and issues | | 29:27 | Learning from failed details; why R&D in architecture matters | | 36:52 | Everyday project lessons: device/equipment coordination headaches | | 38:22 | How missed coordination undermines the intended design |

Episode Tone & Takeaways

The conversation is marked by curiosity, camaraderie, a persistent desire to learn, and a healthy self-deprecation. Cormac and Evan do not shy away from critiquing themselves or the broader profession, seeing both beauty and faults in the built environment—and using each as a springboard for future rigor.

Final Takeaway:
Architecture lives in the details—the glorious and the flawed. Whether studying Kahn’s rigor, Gehry’s bravado, SANAA’s transparency, or the installer’s missteps, only by confronting the misalignments of rigor, both literally and metaphorically, does the profession evolve.