The Einstein Tower Megan Fritzler | EVDA 621

A | Form
Modern, organic, monumental and expressive are all formal descriptions that come
to the forefront in the attempt to qualify the form of the Einstein Tower. Interestingly,
many of these descriptors seem to be incongruous with respect to one another. The
words modern and organic connote polarizing impressions making them difficult
to reconcile in a single gesture. In the climate of an uprising social order, Eric
Mendelsohn’s Einstein Tower merged such opposing concepts based on a formal
German Pride

strategy of relating mass and motion to embody a functional program inside an

organic monument to science.

From a social science perspective, the German nation in 1921 was widely recovering
from its World War One defeat and ascending into the age of ‘The Weimar Republic’
and hyperinflation. Albert Einstein, who had proposed his now famous Theory of
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 Relativity in 1919, was becoming a celebrity to a German citizenry searching for
a sense of nationalistic pride (James, 1994). Although resources were scarce, a
Figure A.1 | The monumental countour celebration of this German achievement was warranted. In 1921, “The call, couched
of the Einstein Tower can be corellated in nationalistic terms, pleaded for the money for just one site where German research
with the period of German nationalism could be given a chance to hold its own against the numerous experiments being
that followed its construction. conducted at the time in England, France, and America…” (James, 1994, p. 400).
 The call was for an observatory tower to prove and to celebrate Einstein’s Theory This sense of organic formation simultaneously awakens within the building a
(Weston, 2004). The function of the Einstein Tower was scientific, however, the spirit progressive energy that makes the building seem as if it could leap forth from its
of the times dictated another need: for a monument to ignite the pride of the German static position. The scale and materiality that attribute the iconoclastic quality to
nation. With its monolithic central volume and modern vigor, Mendelsohn’s design the tower are balanced by the rhythmic composition of volumes that surround it.
met this need. “Nothing could be further from echoing a lingering past, from stylistic The arrangement of the curvilinear masses serves to excite a sense of movement
tag-ends and souvenirs. Rather, here young Germany, the after-war generation, spoke within the heavy formations. The lower volumes act as a base for the central domed
out clear and strong, and with the assurance of power.’ (Whittick, 1956, p .54). tower balancing the building’s quantities. The smooth and seamless quality of the
exterior skin was achieved through the exploration of concrete and stucco on brick
horizontal + vertical elements The Tower was also monumental in the new architecture it espoused with its dynamic (Weston, 2004). The materiality adds a plasticity that softens the monumental
stability. Designed as an homage to relativity, the formal strategy of the Einstein qualities of the building.
Tower was scientifically reducible to Einstein’s theory in which energy is equal to mass
scientific
multiplied by the speed of light squared (E=MC2). The equation was the foundation While the exterior skin was left up to Mendelsohn’s expressionist discretion, the
function
for the buildings formal conception; Mendelsohn sought a relationship between mass building’s interior was derived as a product of function. The Einstein Tower was
and movement in the form of the Einstein Tower (James, 1999). conceived of in order to prove the Theory of Relativity by means of measuring
the shifting spectrum of the sun through a large and powerful telescope (Fara,
Mendelsohn realized mass and movement simultaneously through an amalgamation 2005). The interior of the building was determined by a program of rigid scientific
of heavy, monumental volumes with curvilinear elements carved from a thick exterior. requirements which dictated the volumes that would be required. In direct contrast
In his evocation of magnitude, Mendelsohn asserted that the, “line must die, [it] to Mendelsohn’s concept of movement for the exterior, the inner tower, which was
must become the contour of the mass…Architecture is domination of the mass.” to encase the instrumentation, had to be void of movement in order to provide
(James, 1994, p. 402). To this end Mendelsohn attributed increased thickness to the human accurate measurements (James, 1999). A 150 foot tower was needed to house
diameter of the tower. The use of concrete, a building material which was relatively function the scientific equipment for the building. Such a prescribed and highly engineered
curved + angled elements new at the time, enhanced the sense of heaviness. The materiality used to sculpt interior program served as a ‘functional check’ on Mendelsohn’s form (James, 1999).
the form suggests an architecture of weight; openings seem too peer out, carved Mendelsohn was commissioned to
from the helm of a thick volume. Mendelsohn created a structure of such mass that provide a ‘shell’ for the functional
it appeared to emerge geologically, like a rock formation organically rising from the workings of the interior (Fara, 2005).
earth (Weston, 2004). Exterior
Figure A.3| The scale of functions
Figure A.2| Sections through the which take place in the Einstein
Einstein Tower show the form Figure A.4| The interior and
Tower encompasses a large range
fragmented into two categories, exterior of the Einstein Tower
in height.
exhibit various states of rigidity Interior
and plasticity.
 modernist infrared

The arrangement and manner in which form would enclose the interior occupations
became a representation of and monument to the sciences of mass and motion. bodily
The monumental tower was functionally required, but its dynamic expression also limitation
served to celebrate the newly discovered technology and efficiency. By making the
outter ‘shell’ of the building resemble a machinelike organism, Mendelsohn explored
a dynamic functionalism.

The dome atop the telescopic projection provides the only suggestion as to the
buildings function. The dome is the most notable conformity to the conventional B | Body
observatory typology; the Einstein Tower counters its typology in all other ways. The
mechanization of its scientific function is replaced by an organic nature. Although its ultraviolet Although physics is a science that pervades daily life, its workings are unfamiliar to
sleek volumes and lack of décor are modern, the mechanization and efficiency of the the average human. The Einstein Tower acts as an extension through which such
interior are masked by fluidity. The telltale dome is diminished in the face of other complex and transcendental information is sampled and studied by the human mind.
curvilinear forms which accompany it within the overall naturalized form. In such a way, the Einstein Tower is an extension of the body in which mankind’s
physical and mental barriers are overcome. The building translates science to the
The organic nature of the Einstein tower serves to set it apart from other contemporary spectrum spectrum mind by extending the sensory capabilities of the body. The Einstein Tower, is a case
visible with visible with of, “amplification rather than a simple replication of bodily experience.” (Vidler, 1990,
observatories. The combination of the natural with the modern, motion with mass,
telescope eye
and function with expression unite in order to create this monument to science and P.4). The Einstein Tower relates to humankind in the simultaneous and reciprocal act
the spirit of the times. of heightening the abilities of the body and transmuting itself to relate to the mind
producing a vessel which the body can unite with in order to reach and disseminate
new planes of understanding.
cornea
lens Building as Extension

An amplification of sensory experience is achieved through the function of the Einstein

Figure A.5| The Einstein Tower retina Tower as a solar observatory. Mankind is limited to viewing a finite spectrum of light.
makes use of two artistic The Einstein Tower empowers the human body with new sensory experiences by
movements characteristic of enabling humans to view the infrared end of the light spectrum. In allowing for the
the time. Figure B.1 | Light Spectrum visibility: discernment of otherwise indiscernible data, the building acts as a machine which
expressionist Telescope vs. Eye humans use to overcome the obstacles that limit the capabilities of the human body.
 In order to engage with the buildings capabilities, the body which to elevate the body away from the limitations of the earthbound mind. Visually and
inhabits the system must be in possession of scientific knowledge. spatially, the Tower expands the eye of the user and in so doing promotes the mind
The Einstein Tower allows a higher level of perception, but a higher to a new level of understanding.
level of understanding is only attainable with a prescribed set of
previous experience. The buildings exterior and interior are sculpted of concrete composed so as to create
an analogy to the human body (James, 1997). The overall skin of the building is
When building and body are engaged in an interaction, the hybrid mimetic of human texture and curvature. Surfaces protrude and retreat suggesting
system of man and building becomes more ablebodied. The body the building as both vessel and vehicle. The smooth hollows carved out of the
gains visual perception unreachable outside of the walls. In an buildings skin impersonate the female role of the vessel carrying the body. The
educated member of the scientific community the building gains concave openings extending from the buildings base curve and stretch to receive and
an operator and interpreter. Conversely, both building and body envelope the body. Such instances demonstrate the the Einstein Tower is “epitomizing
viewpoint are lessened in the absence of one another. Just as Sartre stated: bodily states or, more importantly, sates of mind based on bodily sensation” (Vidler,
regular spectrum visibility “it is only in a world that there can be a body.” (Vidler, 1990, P.9). 1990, P. 3-4). By personifying the embracing qualities of female curvature the
infrared spectrum visibility The body becomes empowered by the building; the building loses buildings orifices construct for the body
power without the body. a sensation of comfort. The towering
Figure B.2| Visible spectrums of light
at selected viewpoints. monument allows the mind to associate
Building Transmuting to Body with it sensations of masculinity and
progression. Somehow the unfamiliar
The scientific understanding that the building embodies creates ‘the uncanny.’ (Vidler, notion of scientific evolution is made to
1992). Because physics is not a comfortably understood subject, relating it to the seem comfortable. the human presence
body could make for uncomfortable spaces for the body. Mendelsohn’s Tower makes of the Einstein Tower elicits empathy
outside Einstein Tower
the body more at ease in an, “attempt to make an insentient and unresponsive external from the viewer (James, 1997).
reality feeling and responsible, by endowing it with human attributes” (Vidler, 1990, Figure B.5| Concept sketch of Einstein Tower
inside Einstein Tower
P7). Body Transformed by Building done by Erich Mendelsohn exhibiting convex
and concave qualities of the building skin.
The Einstein Tower relates to the human bodies that inhabit it through a language that Mendelsohn’s Einstein Tower produces Retrieved from Bucherverlag, 1992, P.45.
Figure B.4| Selected effects on the body in the form of sensory
speaks of both genders. The Tower professes its scientific preeminence through the
ground plane interior and exterior experience and learned knowledge. The
monumental mimicry of the male organ. The interior of the heightened space serves surfaces.
Figure B.3| Height of body relative to ground
plane: Exterior vs. Interior
 building produces bodies with knowledge of and experience in new planes of learning. The techniques which informed the
Those who engage with it deliver the new knowledge to the masses. In this respect, Einstein Tower encompass both
the Einstein Tower is reversing the relationship with the bodies that inhabit it. Just the creative and the scientific. The
as bodies use it as a vessel to reach higher understanding, the building in turn uses result of these techniques has been
human bodies as vessels to disseminate higher understanding to the masses. a building which imposes its own
technique on its users and viewers.
Incoming knowledge
The Einstein Tower exists in Germany, however, it has the potential to transform The following diagrams will serve to
Outgoing knowledge bodies universally. A body does not need to enter its walls in order to gain knowledge. explore and analyze the techniques
The bodies that interact with the Tower are transformed into transmitters of scientific behind the buildings production
learning and in turn transform other bodies. In the context of cybernetics, the Einstein and its reproductive techniques.
Tower’s potential to disseminate information through bodies may then constitute
C | Technique
Norbert Weiner’s fear that in the relationship between mechanized building and the Figure C.1| Intent
body, the body has become the subordinate (Hayles, 1999).
With respect to creation, two
Conclusion explanations exist: either to regard
organization as, “a fortuitous
The relationship between building and body is represented in the Einstein Tower in concatentation of atoms, or to
several ways. The Einstein Tower is used as an extension of the body which allows relate it to the incomprehensible
for greater experience and understanding. The Tower relates to the body mimetically influence of an external force
by personifying human attributes in order to bring about bodily sensations of that has grouped its elements
comfort and empowerment. By allowing the body to perceive itself at ease with the together.” (Bergson, 2001, P. 242).
empowerment of scientific knowledge, the Einstein Tower enables the transmittance Figure 1 endeavours to decipher
of knowledge through bodies. the production of the Einstein
Tower as an interaction between
singular elements. The social
relations amongst scientists, and
connections to Erich Mendelsohn
and other major contributors will be
mapped with different lineweights
representing relationships and
Figure B.6| Flow of knowledge.
colours denoting communities.
Figure C.1| Conclusions Figure C.1| (Morgenthaler, 1999, P.22). Figure 2 Figure C.2|
will use recombination to explore the
Figure 1 displays a network of different masses that Mendelsohn
loosely organized entropy. Three sketched attempting to capture his
‘clusters’ form. The least developed design. Figure 2 will consist of a
cluster here is around Mendelsohn, series of 14 sketches which will
however, this cluster represents the be made transparent, arranged
integral link between the scientific in an approximate chronological
and creative communities. order on a grid. The images will be
increasingly overlaid from outside
More important is the role of to inside until they consist of one
the catalyst, here Freundlich, to dense mass.
facilitate the ‘colliding‘ of these two
groups of ‘atoms.’ In the context of Figure C.2| Conclusion
Bergson’s theory Freundlich could
be considered the ‘incomrehensible The Figure produced in the exercise
external force’ that organizes these bears resemblance to the building
elements. Perhaps the creator in which was realized, however, there
this case is not Erich Mendelsohn, is no way of knowing if the sketches
but Findlay Freundlich. or the building have captured
the mental images that inspired
Figure C.2|Intent Mendelsohn. The incremental
differences between sketches
Mendelsohn wrote, “...Masses suggest that he was not able to
“...bringing form to chaos – satisfy the form he was visualizing
standing in their ripeness flash
past in a moment and slip away,
is similar to the creation of allowing the conclusion that the
so that it is almost impossible for the earth – creation out of building is just a representation
the hand to note them down even nothing...” of Mendelsohn’s true design.
approximately. I lament the fact The only pure design exists in his
that the hand and vision are not (Morgenathaler, 199, p.18-19 on mental image with the sketches
linked together mechanically.” Mendeslohn’s views on creation) and the building itself being best
approximations.
Figure C.3| Intent Figure C.3| Plate 1

Marshall McLuhan wrote that the

‘medium is the message’ (1995).
Figure 3 will explore the highly
published Einstein Tower as it
was expressed in the media. The
diagram will analyze the content
and message of selected mediaums
by obscuring different contents in
different colours to strip them of
their message. A copy of the same
materials with the content revealed
will allow for a comparison of
the effect that the removal of the
content has on the message sent
by the Einstein Tower through the
selected mediums.

content | Einstein
Mendelsohn
relativity = relitivitat
tower = turm
 Figure C.3| Plate 2
Figure C.3| Conclusions

In comparing plates 1 and 2, one

notes that the message of the
medium is more pure when the
content is obscured. It follows that
portraying the building through
these techniques must somewhat
alter the message of the building;
just as the message of the medium
is encroached upon by the content,
the message of the medium must
affect the message of the content.
Thus, in reproducing itself through
the media, the Einstein Tower alters
the message it sends. As Mcluhan
noted, “any medium has the power
of imposing its own assumption
on the unwary...” (1995. P.157).

Figure C.4| Intent

Figure four will illustrate the relative

audience that the Einstein Tower
reaches at different stages in its
production and reproduction. The
content | Einstein
diagram will employ an illustration Mendelsohn
of the concept of the building at relativity = relitivitat
different key phases and represent
tower = turm
its relative reach at that phase. An
analysis of the change that
 Figure D.1|
takes place between stages will Figure C.4|
Figure 1 is intended as a means
be achieved by illustrating the
to test to what extent the Einstein
combined midpoints of each stage.
Tower abides by the concept of
D | Space
euclidean space as opposed to more
Figure C.4| Conclusions
intesive spatial qualities. By placing
the spaces of the Einstein Tower on
Thomas Kuhn states that new
the traditional cartesian grid, one
theories can only be accepted
discovers that the formal logic of the
when old theories are proven to
interior spaces of the Einstein tower
be wrong (1996). Therefore the
is surprisingly symmetrical. This has
purity of a concept is paramount
implications for how one perceives
to scientific revolution. Also
and uses the space; the symmetry
paramount to revolution is
gives the space a predictability and
widespread dissemination.
comfort. Figure D.1| euclidean comparison
The diagram betrays a tradeoff;
The buildings exterior is much more
the message of the concept must
liberated from the grid showing
mutate in order to be conveyed
considerably less symmetry and
through greater means to reach
further differentiation from the
greater audiences. The masses
rectilinear concept of space.
will never get the message in its
Concrete was used to carry out this
pure form. The Einstein Tower is a
less refined notion of space. The
representation of relativity theory
material was used to obscure the
offering a compromised view of it
langauge of the interior spaces
to its viewers. The extended arrow
and create another language on the
has been added to demonstrate the relative size of audience reached by medium
exterior. The exterior of the Einstein
ongoing mutation of the concept
Tower acts as an object in space to
as it continues to be reproduced.
be reacted to. Figure 1 reveals that
human behaviour on the
 a fourth floor
| plan view

interior and the exterior of the space Figure D.2| spatial inhabitation
may be affected differently due to the
work, “as the empowering agent for Figure D.3| ‘the naked building’
research...toward purposefully violating
different treatments of space as a
boundaries, hybridizing processes.”
symmetrical enclosure and a sculpted fourth floor | plan view
to output scientific decisions and
e
object respectively.
solutions (Taron, 2011, P. 22). When
the spaces of the operator and the
Figure D.2|
machine are used in tandem or in other b d
words when the spatial boundaries are
Figure 2 was intended as a means to
‘violated’, an integrative process of
discover the occupiable space within
research results.
the Einstein Tower. The diagram
reveals that the central area of each
a c
Figure D.3|
floor is not inhabitable. These spaces
basement
are not governed by the human, but | plan view
Guy Debord’s 1957 concept of The
by the telescopic equipment the tower
Naked City exposed the city as a series
was built to house; the human is
of separate but connected ‘unit[ies]
limited to traversing the space around
of atmosphere.” (McDonough, 2004,
the equipment.
P.242). By applying Debord’s approach,
Figure 3 reveals the great number of
e
By revealing the spatial allocation of
united spaces as well as the great
the building, Figure 2 analyses the
number of intervals between spaces in
program which the space endorses. basement | plan view
the Einstein Tower. When comparing
In many ways, the spatial allocation
Figures 2 and 3, one can deduce that
of the Einstein Tower can be said to
encompass a space of integrative
much of the connections between
spaces are necessitated by the space b d
programming; both the human and space occupied by wall
required by the telescope equipment.
the machine are given soveriegnty
space uninhabitable by human body The vertical arrows connecting
through their designated spaces.
relatively small spaces indicate that the
This spatial articulation of human space inhabitable by human body *letters correlate the view of the
height of the tower is in fact composed
and machine conditions against one space to location of the space in
completely of interstitial
another can plan
c
 Works Consulted
space necessitated by the need time the users of the building come with the space of the equipment to design and construct,” the increasing
for access to the telescope. Much increasingly to govern it, further and there comes a new relationship simultaneity of the use of space in the
Bergson, H. (1907). Creative Evolution, Elec Book.
of the tower is therefore space further violating the original spatial of collaboration between the two Einstein Tower may promise to output
between spaces or places. boundaries of the building. different space governing bodies. The higher degrees of scientific research
Bucherverlag, R. M. (1992). Erich Mendelsohn Complete Works of the
culture of the space, or the mode of through increased conceptual integration
Architect. (Antje Fritsch, Trans.). New York: Princeton Architectural
Figure D.4| The increasing ‘violation’ of the spatial behaviour, transforms as the spatial of space (Kolarevic, P.150). As the space
Press, 1992. (Original work published 1930).
boundaries of the space over time has boundaries and relationships change integrates over time, its culture changes
Figure 4 seeks to identify the particular implications for what the over time. Just as, “higher degrees and its potential to produce greater
Cobbers, A. (2007). Mendelsohn. Germany: Taschen.
changes that have taken place space outputs. With the increasing of integration promise buildings minds, bodies, decisions and solutions
within a particular interior space of integration of the human space that are better, faster, and cheaper increases with integration.
Fara, P. (2005). Monuments to Einstein. Endeavour, 29(2), 58-59.
the tower from its conception to the
present day. The photograph to the Figure D.4| space & time
Hayles, N.K. (1999). How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in
right displays a perspective of the
Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics. Chicago: University of Chicago
work room in the past. Subsequent
Press.
photos show the same room at
present day. The black and white
Hentschel, K. (1997). The Einstein Tower: An Intertexture of Dynamic
renderings depict the incremental
Construction, Relativity Thoery, and Astronomy. (Anne Hentschel, Trans.).
changes that have taken place in
California: Stanford Press. (Original Work Published 1992).
the space betwen the two periods.

The space over time has become

much more inhabited. Over present
past
James, K. (1994). Expressionism, Relativity and the Einstein Tower. Journal Morganthaler, H.R., (1999). “Why Should We be Laymen with Respect to
of the Society of Architectural Historians, 53(4), 392-413. Retrieved Art?.” In R. Stephan (ed.), Eric Mendelsohn Architect 1887-1953 (26-38).
from http://www.jstor.org/stable/990909. New York: The Monacelli Press.

James, K. (1999). “Organic! Einstein, Finlay Freundlich, Mendelsohn, and Taron, J. (2011). On the Integrative Program in Integration Through Computation,
the Einstein Tower in Potsdam.” In R. Stephan (ed.), Eric Mendelsohn proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the Association for
Architect 1887-1953 (26-38). New York: The Monacelli Press. Computer Aided Design i Architecture (ACADIA).

James, K. (1997). Erich Mendelsohn and the Architecture of German Vidler, A. (1990). The Building in Pain: The Body and Architecture in Post-
Modernism. New York: Cambridge University Press. Modern Culture. AA Files 19, Architectural Association. 3-10.

Kolarevic, B. (2008). Post Digital Architecture: Towards Integrative Design, Vidler, A. (1992). Unhomely Homes. In The Architectural Uncanny,
proceedings of the First International Conference on Critical Digital: What Cambridge: MIT Press.
Matter(s)?
Weston, R. (2004). Key Buildings of the Twentieth Century. London:
Kuhn, T. (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: Laurence King Publishing.
University of Chicago Press.
Whittick, A. (1956). Eric Mendelsohn. Great Britain: The University Press
McDonough, T. (2004). Situationist Space in ed., Guy Debord and the Glasgow.
Situationist International.

Mcluhan, M. (1995). Understanding Media in E. McLuhan and F. Zingrone,

eds., Essential McLuhan. New York: Basic Books.