It's been a long time since any building aroused so much interest and provoked so many comments as the building of the Museum of Modern Art in Warsaw. The design by Thomas Phifer 's studio aroused controversy already a year ago, when its facade was unveiled and everyone's eyes saw an image... one hundred percent congruent with the visualization. MSN is not the largest, most expensive or most popular museum among those currently being erected. So why the excitement? And what is the spectrum of opinions about the "great white block"?
MSN's white concrete planes defy the ponderous context of downtown Warsaw
photo: Nate Cook | courtesy of Thomas Phifer and Partners
Instead of citing the author's descriptions, ideas and inspirations, programmatic assumptions and requirements of the local plan, the whiteness of the facades and proportions, describing the functionality of the gallery halls and the openness of the first floor - which the architectural media have been rolling out without mercy for the past few weeks - we take a look at what critics and critics, cultural and media voices are writing and saying about the building. How is an architectural discussion of unprecedented scale shaping up?
too early to judge
The fatigue of the author of this text in answering the question of what he thinks of the new MSN building, evaluating its architecture, functionality, expecting to take a clear position, resulted in a material illustrating the state of our public debate instead of a text about the museum. Trying to evaluate the building now will also be detrimental to the project itself and unreliable to the public.
After all, when evaluating it from the architectural, compositional or contextual point of view, one should not forget that only half of the project has been created, we will wait for more years for the Variety Theater. The museum will be surrounded by construction sites for the foreseeable future, and at least until the Central Square is put to use, the perception of the building and its accessibility will be severely limited. From the functional and interior architecture side, it is impossible to say whether the building is up to the task, as the first exhibition will not open there until February 2025. What I am able to say at this point is that I understand this project. I understand the reasons behind the solutions adopted, and since I organize exhibitions, it is easy for me to interpret and appreciate certain technical and spatial solutions. As a resident of Warsaw, I am also pleased to see another non-commercial, partially indoor public space.
Central Square, proj.: A-A Collective - the design for the new development of the square was selected in an international competition in 2018
vision: © A-A Collective
a kaleidoscope of other people's opinions
I will try to present different points of view - from the approach of architecture professionals emphasizing the pragmatism and craftsmanship of those designing for Thomas Phifer, to politicians using interest in the building to raise their own capital, to those associated with MSN praising the program solutions, and to art and architecture critics pushing the fact that the Biblao effect only worked in Bilbao.
(...) this is a building that cannot give one answer. It has no right to evoke one emotion, one message. If it did, it would be inadequate for the art it is supposed to house.
- Filip Springer, Instagram
Although the architectural value of Poland's newest museum is being questioned, the value of the discussion it has generated is invaluable. Some of the opinions voiced and texts published may be indicative of deficiencies in popular spatial education or a crisis in architectural criticism - all the more valuable material for further analysis.
muted press releases
The text deliberately omits the content of the authors and the investor's marketing machine created at the opening - ready quotes and excerpts from press materials. So much space has been devoted to their reproduction that everyone reading this text could read them repeatedly. So let's try to read the media hype they generated.
localization, stupid!
Let's start at the beginning. Why does the building of the Museum of Modern Art in Warsaw, an investment that has been underway for twenty years and has just been commissioned in a form that almost completely coincides with the visualizations presented earlier, arouse so much public interest? The answer seems extremely simple - it's its location.
We expected this, since the building stood in the center of the city and is highly visible. We were bracing ourselves for the fact that this moment, when the scaffolding falls down, will involve the start of a public discussion.
- Joanna Mytkowska, "The museum happens inside," A&B 09/2023
And indeed, the discussion that unfolded in mid-2023 was extremely lively, although it concerned only the façade and body of the building. Opinions were only concerned with the aesthetics of the as yet unfinished facades. The spectrum of the current discussion is much broader.
Not very green concrete
The most important issue that designers now have to address when arguing their design decisions is the environmental impact of the building. We live in an era of accelerating climate crisis, the broader building sector, as responsible for 1/3 of the world'sCO2 emissions into the atmosphere, can no longer escape this responsibility. Is a big concrete block on a previously undeveloped plot of land a good answer to these problems? It seems not. It's hard to find in the MSN edifice technologies related to reducing its environmental impact or use of resources. It is basically a monument to concrete and its associated emissions.
Sure, I would prefer to visit this museum in some existing edifice converted for the needs of this institution. Does Warsaw have such buildings in suitably attractive locations? Not likely.
- Filip Springer, "What's the Elephant, or the new MSN building in Warsaw," Institute of Reportage, patronite.pl
Springer's voice requires adding a bitter context - well, there were buildings in Warsaw that the City could have adapted, but the authorities got rid of them. These include, for example, the Powiśle Power Plant or the Emilia pavilion, in which MSN functioned temporarily.
Another argument related to the criticism of the adopted location, raised among others by architect, councilor and editor of the quarterly "Rzut" Zofia Piotrowska, is that the construction of the Museum was not used to strengthen revitalization efforts in more peripheral neighborhoods. Focusing on the center would be to err on the side of pushing toward centralization in a city that wants to base its development strategy on polycentricity. And of course, it's hard not to agree that Warsaw has completely neglected to support local centers. However, I do not think that erecting an MSN in one of them exactly is a desirable action. For the local community, it could be an outside intrusion, a stripped-down activity, foreign and aimed at audiences outside the area. For the Museum, it would most likely mean marginalization and much lower attendance. It should also be remembered that Warsaw's Downtown is a depopulating district. The construction of the MSN will not keep people there, but all of the planned transformations within the New City Center have a chance of doing so. However, they must be implemented with respect for the habits and comfort of the residents and inhabitants of downtown Warsaw. The ideal neighborhood for the MSN on the other side of Central Square (proj. A-A Collective), in my opinion, would not be the "Central Park" proposed by Jan Śpiewak, but the restoration of the service function advocated by Jan Mencwel and the reconstruction in a new market hall befitting the stature of the place.
Central Square, proj.: A-A Collective - the design for the new development of the square was selected in an international competition in 2018
vision: © A-A Collective
energy and permanence
Criticism of the Museum building for overlooking environmental issues comes easily, because the concrete edifice does not pretend to be anything else. It is sincere in its structure, it doesn't hide behind green walls and an extensive green roof, and it doesn't use greenwashing strategies to distract attention from the real problems of manufactured architecture. Two themes dominate the discussion of trying to reduce environmental impact - sustainability and energy procurement.
The subway line running directly underneath (and partly even inside) the MSN building has been used to extract thermal energy to heat the building. Of course, as Springer notes, such a large volume requires constant connection to HVAC(Heating, Ventilation, Air Conditioning) systems. Joanna Mytkowska points out that the Museum will try to obtain energy from clean sources, even at the expense of some programmatic action. She sees the environmental responsibility of MSN's architecture elsewhere, however.
It is important to remember that decisions were made twenty years ago. The last competition in which this project was selected was held in 2013, a time when this discussion was almost non-existent. (...) It seems to me that this building, and public buildings in general, think a little differently about environmental responsibility. The MSN building is, first of all, very sustainable, and if we spread the carbon footprint over the planned lifespan for it of about a hundred years, this result is favorable.
- Joanna Mytkowska, "The museum happens inside," A&B 09/2023
Perhaps it is the durability of the solutions used, cast-in-place walls instead of panel cladding on complex hanger systems, that will become an advantage in the future, and the building itself - as Simone De Iacobis and Malgorzata Kuciewicz of Central would see it - a climate shelter? We also have large museums with falling apart facades in Warsaw, and no one asks about the carbon footprint of replacing and maintaining these elements.
HUGE
A purely technical argument that can be described in numbers and objectified is also the question of museum size. Is the white block really that big? Architectural critic and influencer Radoslaw Gajda thinks so, and gives specific numbers.
(...) the building is indeed very large. It is 104 meters long, about 40 wide and 26 high. Inside, it houses nearly 20,000 square meters of total space, including more than 4,500 square meters of exhibition space. It is larger than the side "paws" of the Palace of Culture and Science with which it neighbors.
- Radoslaw Gajda, www.raportwarszawski.pl
And while these numbers may be impressive, when juxtaposed with other figures for museums or buildings in the area, they become quite average. The 4,500 square meters of exhibition space pales next to the 8,700 galleries at the Museum of Polish History. The permanent exhibition at the neighboring Museum of the Polish Army (which is still waiting for a second pavilion) is 2,700 square meters, the exhibitions at the European Solidarity Center in Gdansk take up 3,000, the exhibitions at the ms2 branch of the Museum of Art in Lodz take up slightly more, and the permanent exhibition at Polina is over 4,000 square meters. MSN therefore does not stand out against this background. The sheer volume of the Museum is determined by the Local Development Plan, which has been in effect since 2011, so it should also come as no surprise - it is exactly what the planners expected.
It should also be remembered that the volume of the Museum erected according to Thomas Phifer's design is half the size of the one designed by Christian Kerez. Breaking it into two separate parts, creating additional connections between Swietokrzyski Park and Central Square significantly improved the urbanistic value of the project. Urbanistically, by the way, the building's proportions are definitely on the scale of its surroundings, which perhaps not all architects notice, but some cultural people do.
I do not understand the comments that it is "scaled up" - because, after all, it is exactly on the scale of the opposite frontage of Marszalkowska Street, i.e. the Centrum Department Stores. I also don't understand the accusations that it has a modern form - it's not the Museum of Territorial Life or Vistula Gothic, so it's not surprising that it doesn't have the shape of a mansion, a row of Mannerist townhouses or a Gothic cathedral.
- Jacek Dehnel, Facebook
they're the same picture
Staying with comparisons and the language of memes that has been used since the Christian Kerez project, we can look at the new Warsaw museums through the prism of a scene from "The Office," in which the series' Pam, asked by the corporation to point out the differences between two pictures, remarks that they're the same picture. Transferring this to Warsaw - Dehnel also notes this.
Three major museums have recently been built in Warsaw: the Polin, Polish History and MSN. All of them, from the outside, are simple "boxy" forms, yet it is MSN that takes the biggest beating. Why? I don't know.
- Jacek Dehnel, Facebook
Of course, the Museum of Polish History (proj. WXCA) is no longer such a fresh subject, so its presence in the media has diminished as well. However, it has never been as controversial as the MSN, even just after its opening. And objections to its architecture - from its enormous scale and simple facades with few windows, to the carbon footprint of stone imported from Portugal, to the large concrete plaza in front - may be similar to those present in the discussion of MSN. Why is the criticism so uneven? Although not even Joanna Mytkowska knows the reasons, she seems to welcome such a turn of events.
I don't know why Poles don't discuss the new History Museum building. If we consider the architectural expression, for the layman these are not very different forms. The topic is much more concerning to everyone, and the Museum of Modern Art is being discussed. We, on the whole, are happy about this, because when the dust settles, the knowledge that there is such an institution will remain in the consciousness, we will be a little more recognizable.
- Joanna Mytkowska, "The museum happens inside," A&B 09/2023
Mytkowska herself, by the way, describes the very violent public debate as a "founding experience" for the Museum, and points out that similar controversy accompanied the 2007 presentation of Christian Kerez's project, now considered by many to be an outstanding concept. This may indicate that the tropes in the search for the source of interest are two - the exposed location, the opposite of the MHP, and the consistently constructed minimalism.
International competition to develop an architectural concept for the Museum of Modern Art in Warsaw; - First Prize - Christian Kerez, Switzerland
competition materials
Any way you look at it, both Kerez and Phifer approached the subject in very similar ways. Both, of course, started with a careful analysis of the context.
- Robert Konieczny, "In Warsaw, a twisted building in the style of Frank Gehry would be better? Katowice knew how not to overwhelm the Spodek," Dziennik Zachodni.
(not) fucking the context
And it is this context, rather than the Museum itself, that seems not even so much controversial as inherently controversial. Were Kerez and Phifer right to refer to a collage composed of the remnants of pre-war buildings, the enormity and visual weight of the richly decorated Palace of Culture and Science, theScience, the light, albeit demolished by redevelopment facades of the Center Department Stores, and a background composed of generic glass boxes of office towers in such a simple and neutral way? Has the result been a radically contextualized building or an extreme out of context building?
I guess that's the dissonance that many of the voices critical of the new MSN headquarters are talking about. It's not that the new building "doesn't fit" into its surroundings, because it's hard to point out what specifically it should "fit" into, but that it doesn't actually enter into any relationship with its surroundings. By the decision of the architects, it is devoid of anchor points, actually separated from the urban context by a mass of white concrete with barely a few openings and a thin gap at the bottom.
- Radoslaw Gajda, www.raportwarszawski.pl
We will only be able to assess its relationship with its surroundings once those surroundings are in place. With the completion of Central Square, the reconstruction of Marszałkowska Street and the designation of an above-ground pedestrian walkway, and finally the construction of TR, both the use of the first floor of MSN and the reception and context of the building itself will change completely. Today we are doomed to experience it from only one side, which greatly flattens the discussion of the building, which in my opinion has the advantage of not having a clearly indicated hierarchy, frontage and main entrance.
Central Square is a part of Parade Square and another element of the New Center of Warsaw - it is supposed to be a green meeting place for Varsovians and Varsovian women
vision: © A-A Collective
The heckling that pours out on this building is, in my opinion, unfair. The museum, designed by Thomas Phifer, may not be a masterpiece on the scale of the world's most outstanding achievements, but it is certainly a decent architectural craftsmanship. To me, it is a good background building. And it should be such because of the context in which it is located.
- Robert Konieczny, "In Warsaw a twisted building in the style of Frank Gehry would be better? In Katowice, they knew how not to overwhelm the Spodek," Dziennik Zachodni.
This is an in-between building, and that's what Phifer's proposed solutions highlight. Wooden rest rooms opening with views of the city, a loggia on the side of Marszalkowska Street, a large panoramic window on the side of the Palace of Culture.
Right next to the entrance to the Museum is a pit in the floor, which is intended to be the public heart of the building. Such a large "conversation pit" where public events will be held. From my point of view - and I was on the scene - it is perfectly designed. The audience is not too far away, there is a nice horizontal contact with them. There is plenty of light in the room, and there is a connection to the outside.
- Kuba Snopek, Facebook
No building in the center of Warsaw gives so much conscious contact with its context, and we are talking, after all, about a museum, which by virtue of its function limits natural light in the interiors. Things are different here. Prof. Ewa Kurylowicz also reminds us of the changing context of the museum.
If I were to look for flaws in this project, I think it would only be that it did not create a frontage on Marszalkowska Street (...). After all, he couldn't have done it himself. But he started it, and he started it well. And I'm convinced that he set the standard, that the next buildings will have to match it in terms of elegance and calmness of architecture.
- Ewa Kurylowicz in: Michal Wojtczuk, ""Container" and "bunker" or "phenomenal building"? The Museum of Modern Art opens, which Warsaw is already arguing about," Gazeta Wyborcza.
What about the spatial, external relations with the context of the existing surroundings? Is the MSN really devoid of them, as Gajda claims? For me, the massing of the MSN is an obvious reinterpretation of the Department Stores. The views on the axes opened by the Museum's row of revolving doors and the stores across the street are amazing. Pedestrian movement, the performativity of the street have been built into the design. The arcades and bypasses around are also a reference to the opposite side of the street. And although criticized for hanging the façade wall too low (270 centimeters from the sidewalk level), this decision is precisely a consequence of the desire to emphasize the building's function.
Yes, we have a huge white box on Marszalkowska Street. Its presence - in the intention of the designers and the declarations of Museum representatives - was to connect the Parade Square and the surroundings of the palace with what is happening on Marszałkowska Street in the vicinity of the Center Houses and Wiecha Passage. (...) To this end, too, the first floor of the new edifice will be open to passersby, including those who will treat passing through the museum as a convenient shortcut.
- Filip Springer, "What's the Elephant, or the new MSN building in Warsaw," Institute of Reportage, patronite.pl
The museum sends a clear visual message - this is a public building. Its whiteness, proportions, lack of cutting, loggias, panoramic windows and arcades are only possible because of its function. It is consistently anti-commercial and so are its arcades - not focused on transactivity and visibility, but on usability and experiencing space. In a city built up with almost identical glass office buildings, such a different massing can be a dissonance. However, it seems that the message was to some extent a product of pragmatism rather than the designers' ideological intentions, as indicated by the institution's director.
This is probably not architecture speaking. When looking for an architect for the Museum, especially after the failure of the process with Christian Kerez, whose design was excellent, we had a very pragmatic approach. We were looking for someone who can build a museum functionally, without exaggeration, without Zaha Hadid-type infatuation, but at the same time in a very practical way.
- Joanna Mytkowska, "The museum happens inside," A&B 09/2023
non-national museum
This interpretation of the context and response to the observed conditions obviously does not satisfy everyone. And the right side of the political scene has been loudest in informing everyone of its lack of satisfaction. This makes her silence on the opening of the Museum of Polish History all the more surprising. Perhaps she simply overlooked it, just as the architect from Koscielisko, Sebastian Pitoń, sometimes called the Gaudi of Zakopane, seems to have done with his own idea of a "Trzaskowski block."
(...) we will rebuild it with an elevation that will fit the context. To maintain symmetry and harmony, we need to build a second similar building, for example, the Museum of Polish History. In such a layout, an ideal place for a triumphal arch is created in front of the Palace of Culture (...) to meet the critics of the Palace of Culture who see it as a manifestation of the area being marked by communism, he proposes to place a statue of the Virgin Mary on top of it.
- Sebastian Pitoń, Facebook
Encouraged by the popularity of his vision, which has been covered by industry portals and national media, Pitoń has also prepared a second concept, no longer covering only Central Square, but the entire area around the Palace of Culture, with multiple museums, two exclusively Polish shopping malls, and the whole covered by dense vegetation on green roofs.
Many note that Rafał Trzaskowski will use the opening of MSN as a success in his presidential election campaign, just as Lech Kaczyński did with analogous investments. Thus, the rash of ironic comments against the building should come as no surprise. Suffice it to mention the videos uploaded by Patryk Kaki folding rather undemanding origami meant to reflect the architecture of the new museum.
A slightly more serious (and, as if he wanted to be seen - pragmatic) approach was shown by Krzysztof Bosak, who also proposes enclosing the MSN edifice with a facade, but in a more restrained form.
The MSN edifice has one advantage: thanks to the perpendicular shape of its body, it can still be transformed into something that looks like a building.
- Krzysztof Bosak, Facebook
He accompanied his post with a visualization prepared by Marta and Tomasz Geras, architects who specialize in "classical architecture," in line with the demands of the "Architectural Revolt," which restores classical building patterns. The Geras are relentless in converting more buildings in Warsaw sinning with too simple modernist forms into classical ones - in this case operating with aesthetics bordering on socialist realism, neoclassicism, art déco, and ultimately just kitsch.
The visualization we made can be seen as a juxtaposition of historical forms, but also simply as a juxtaposition of forms: successful or not. When we cook dumplings, for example, we do not care that the recipe is already several hundred years old, kitchen technology has advanced, and the dish does not reflect the "spirit of the time" - because we value the dish for its taste. Let's return to such rational thinking about architecture, and new buildings will simply start to please us; instead of dividing and irritating us.
- Marta and Tomasz Geras, in Amelia Sarnowska, "The architects created a "classic" version of the MSN project. They talk about 'turning back the Vistula with a stick'," onet.pl
Crying for Bilbao
Of course, not only the right-wing promoters of the revival of social realism (sic!) are disappointed, but also those who expected avant-garde architecture, the embodiment of modernity and innovation. Given the protracted nature of the investment process, none of this could have happened. The first concepts of the museum realized today were created a decade ago. Trends in architecture change rapidly - while architecture itself is characterized by great inertia, it is not a creative field that is able to react quickly.
Was a mistake made by not updating the project? I believe not - the resources invested, the time, also the footprint, resources and analysis required responsible action, and the consistent implementation of the accepted concept did just that. Just a decade ago, did Phifer's design stand out above the average? Rather, it was in line with trends, up-to-date and completely uncontroversial. Ten years later, it indeed no longer belongs to the avant-garde of architecture. But can any of the museums in Poland dedicated in recent years boast this?
It is a wonderful testament to the fact that we are a province completely devoid of ambition to go beyond our provincial league. When the Guggenheim Museum in New York, the Pompidou Center in Paris or the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao opened, they were building iconic edifices that were something completely new, something that was later imitated. This was the architecture of its time, it was the architecture-impulse. Avant-garde.
- Marcin Zgliński, Head of the Department of Fundamental Art History Research (2012), Editor-in-Chief of the Catalogue of Art Monuments in Poland (2008) at the Institute of Art of the Polish Academy of Sciences
Were concrete boxes the only choice? Of course not. Therefore, it would be more interesting today to have a discussion not with the architects themselves, but with the competition judges and the people who chose the project. Were their hopes fulfilled? There were many works in the 2007 competition that would probably have pleased the more avant-garde-minded viewers. Reviewing their visualizations, however, we can breathe a sigh of relief that none of them came to fruition. Seventeen years ago, deconstructivism and postmodernism were already in retreat, and it was in this aesthetic that many concepts were maintained. Some operated with a corporate aesthetic, blending the museum into the bland background of office towers. Kerez's design, particularly refined in its later stages, but Phifer's concept against this backdrop seems a very good choice that has stood the test of time.
international competition for the architectural concept of the Museum of Modern Art in Warsaw - 1st Prize - Christian Kerez, Switzerland.
© Christian Kerez | competition materials
When one looks at the other works that took part in the competition won by Kerez, it turns out that many of them were downright caricatures. (...) Of course, people mostly wanted an iconic, twisted Frank Gehry-style building. The votes in favor of the Kerez building were initially very few.
- Robert Konieczny, "In Warsaw, a twisted building in the style of Frank Gehry would be better? Katowice knew how not to overwhelm the Spodek," Dziennik Zachodni.
Lack of icons is not Poland's problem
Unambiguous opinions and zero-sum comments, in-depth analyses, dozens of columns and social media reports. Memes, posters, discussions among friends and family. This immense interest makes the Museum rise to the rank of the most important new building in Poland, despite its shortcomings. Is it a good thing that this laurel of precedence went to a building that is "merely correct," "pragmatic," designed by an "architect of excellent craftsmanship," creating "background architecture"? In my opinion, yes, for this is what we need.
MSN exhibition hall with a sculpture by Sandra Mujinga, an artist from the Democratic Republic of Congo
Photo: Nate Cook | courtesy of Thomas Phifer and Partners
A discussion about mediocrity, about what is good enough, about what builds our everyday life. Outstanding buildings are being built in Poland, architecture winning awards for extraordinary solutions. However, the mediocrity of Polish women and men is, after decades of pastelosis, caged rearing in pat-developer housing estates made up of white blocks with gray stripes. The discussion of what architecture should be good enough is exactly what we need. Radical ordinariness. Radical ordinariness. Radical permanence and sincerity. And that's what the new MSN building offers, and all in all, it's a good thing, nothing more.
Kacper Kępiński
more: A&B 12/2024 - THIRD SITES,
download free e-publications of A&B
