INTIMACY AND SPECTACLE THE INTERIORS OF ADOLF LOOS Beatriz Colomina 0 Ihe so Lave tes, tes Wale Rejoin, nds using the recent bir ofthe erin, The interior phasies them. An abundance of covers and protein liars cases is devised on which three of objets end every day ue are mprimed. Te races othe oocpens sk eve thelr Smpesson onthe intro, "The detest soy that follows those trac comes ino being. Te ernas ofthe fst eective ‘ove are meihergonlemen nor apaches, But private members of ‘he brurgeoive| “here an interior inte detective nove. But can there be a deectve try ofthe iteror el, of fe iden mechanisms by ‘hich spaces const a interior? Where mld ie traces be imprinted? What lus do me uve po on? {isle known fagmen of Le Corpser’s Urbane (925) sas a follows ‘Loon ol me ony "A calvated ran docs mt Isak et ofthe wndon i inde mace of grou gat i thre onl to et thei in two et the ges pas ough °? I pout conspctots, yt conspnsl gore etre of Loos’ houses not enyat al the windows ctr opaque or covered with sheer curtains, atthe organtation ofthe spaces andthe ception ofthe bultin friar Grvmeuble) seems to hinder accesso hem ‘sofa icon placed athe fat of 4 window stat he oceans ‘wih eicbock of facing he room Fig.) Thisesen hggens Svih te ior ta Lo nto cer Iteroe spaces a8 me Siting are ofthe ladies Tange inte Miler hoa (Prag, 1930) (Fig 2. Moreover uponenteringa Los tron one iscomtinaly !uming around tof the space on ut moved tech, thor thanthe space shat or the space outside With each in, exch ook back, our prope ishaled. Looking athe photograph, is ssy to imagine ones n these preci, static poskion, usally in cated bythe unoseiie Fart, and to magi ta tisinended that thee spaces be comprehended by cccpaton by sing the fuer, by ‘entenng the photograph, by iaabring Tate Maller house (View, 1928) here ia raaed siting area oft the ving room, wh soa staat the indo AlRoagh One cant se ot the window, ts presence is rong fel. Te Socshelessrrnding the oan he igh coming fom bind ‘tangata comfortable nook for reading (Fg. 3). Bt comfort thsapac mere than oxen, for hee alo payerlogia dimerson, The poston of ke sof and tscccopnt gait the light produces © seme of secuny Any inter ascending the Sis from the ertrance (ts a cr Gark pasags and entering ‘he lvng voor ould fhe 8 fe omens ro recogze anyone siting on the sofa. Conversely, any intrusion would soon be de- tected by a person occupying this area, just as an actor entering the ‘Sage is immediately sen by u spectator in 2 theatre box (Fig. 4). [Loos cbsorved tht ‘tho smaliness of a theatre box would be ua tearable if one could not Took cut ito the large space beyond” ‘Both Kulka and Miz interpret this as «reference tothe economy ‘of space provided by the Rawnplan, but they overlook its psyeho- logial dimension. For Locs, the theatre box exist a the interso= ‘ion of claustrophobia and agoraphobia. This sptial-psyehoogical ‘device could als be read in terms of power, oF regimes of control inside the house. The rvsed siting area ofthe Meller house peo ‘ides the oocupant witha vantage point overlooking the inte ‘Comfort in this space is relates to Doe invimacy and contro This area isthe moet intimate of the sequence of living spaces, et, paradoxically itoccupiesa volume that projects from the street “apade, just above te font entrance and, moreover, it corresponds ‘with te largest window on this elevation (Fig. 5). A person inside the space can easly se anyone crossing the thresholé ofthe house (while screened by the curtain) and monitor any movement in the Inmerior (walle ‘screened by the backlighting) Inthis space, the eye is turned towards the interior. The window ‘does not frame 4 view But is merely a source of light. Te only possible exterior view from this postion requires that the gaze ‘avel the whole depth of the house, from the aloove to the hing room othe music room, which opens on tote back garden (Fig. §) ‘Thus, the exterior view depends upon & view of the interior. ‘The look folded inward upon itself can be traced in other Loos Imerors. Inthe Miller house, for instance, there is an increasing sense of privacy inthe sequence of spaces articulated around the staicase from the drawing room, cote dining room and study (0 the “ladies room" (Zinmmer der Dame) with its mised sitting arc, Which occupies the centre, or hear, ofthe house (Fig, 6) But this spice has a window which looks on tothe living space. Hero, too, the most inmate room resembles 2 theatre bor, and overicoks the entranceto the communal area of the house, so that intruder can ‘easily beeen. Likewise, the view of the exterior, tower the city, from this “hestr box’, is contained within a View of the interior. ‘Thereisalso amore drectand more private routetothe siting tea, astaiease rising From the entrance ofthe drawing room. Suspended thus in the middle of tae house. thisspaceassumesa dual character ithasa ‘sacred’ quality, butislsoa point control. Paradoxical), 8 sense of comfort is produced by two seemingly opposing com itions, intimacy and contol1. Pat for Hons Braroel, Pilsen, 1929. Bedroom with a sofa set against the window: 2. Maller howe, Prague, 1930. The rived sting area inte Zimener ex Dare, ithe window Loking ot he Bg roor 23. Moller house, enna, 1928, The raed sting area ff he ling room, 6 sareeThis is hardly the idea of comfort which is associated with the ineleenth century interior as described by Walter Benjani in his essay ‘Louis-Philippe, or the Ineror’* In Locs's interiors the fente of socurity is ot achieved by simply turning one’s back onthe apd becoming immersed in a private world — ‘abox inthe World theatre’, 9 use Benjamin's metaphor. It is ao longer the house that is a theatre bor: there isa theatre box inside the bouse, overlooking the internal social spaces, so that the inhabitants become both actors in and spectators of family life — involved in, yet detached from their own space.” The classical distinctions botweon inside and outside, private and public, object and subject, ae no longer valid Traitionally, the theatre box provided forth privileged a pri- vate space within the dangerous public realm, by re-establishing the boundaries between inside and outside. When Loos designed theatre in 1898 (an unrealized projec, e omitted the boxes, arg ing that they “ida't suit a modeca auditorium’ * Thus he removed, the box from the public theatre, only wo insert it into the “private theatre’ of the house. The public realm had entered the private house by way ofthe socal spaces,” and the domestic theatre box represented alas stand of resistance to this intron ‘The theatre boxes in the Moller and Miller houses are spaces marked as female, the domestic character ofthe furnitae contast- ing with that ofthe adjacent ‘male” space, the library (Fig. 6). In these, the leather sofas, the desks, te chimney, the mirrors repre Senta ‘public space” within the house — the office and the club lvading the interior. But it san invasion whichis confioed © an enclosed room — a space which belongs tothe sequence of social spaces within the house, yet does no engage with them. As Miinz notes, the library isa “resorvoir of quietness, ‘sot apart from the household traffic", whereas the raised alcove of the Mller house and the Zinmer der Dame ofthe Mill house not only overlook the socal spaces but re positioned atthe end ofthe sequence. onthe threshold of te private, the secret, the upper rooms, where sexu Aity is sequestered. At the intersection ofthe visible ad the invis= ible, women set asthe guardians ofthe unspeakable. But the theatre box i a device which both protects its occupants and draws atenion to them. MUnz describes entry int the Moller house thus: “Within, entering from one ide, one's gaze travels in the opposite direction tilt restson the light, pleasant alcove, raised above the living oom flor. Now we are realy inside the hoase. "| ‘That is, the intruder has penetrated the house only when his/her gaze srikes this most imimate space, turning the oocupant into silhouette against the ligt.” The ‘voyeur’ in the ‘theatre box” has [become the object of another's gaze; the is caught in the act oF see ing, entrapped in the very woment of contro." In framing a View, the theatre box also frames the viewer. ts impossible to abandon the space, let alone leave the house, without Being seen by those ‘over whom contro is being exertad Object and subject exchange places. Whether there is actually @ person behind either gaze is Irrelevant: ean el mye under the gaze of someone whote eye donot even see, noteven discern, Allthatis necessary for something sighiy to me that {here aye thers here, This window, I k gts ai dark, and Ihave reasons fr tning al theres someone behied i sstalpiaway a gaze From the romeo his gae ex's, sm already something ether, tha ‘ol mel coming an objet forthe paz of others. But inthis poston, which se reciprocal one, thers else know that Lam an chest who krows Fimsel to be soon * Architecture i no simply platform tha accornmodates the view” ing subject. tis a viewing mechanism that produces the subject. It precedes and frames is occupant ‘The theatricality that we sense in interiors by Loos does not ‘depend on the buildings alone. Many of the photographs, for in- stance, tend to give the impression that someone is just shout to enter the room, that a piece of domestic drama i about w be en- acted. The characters abso: from the stage, from the sconcry snd the props — the conspicuously placed pieces of furniture Fig. 7) — fare conjured up." The oaly published photograph of a Leos in terior which includes human figure sa view ofthe entrance tothe ‘rawing room of the Rufer house (Vieng, 1922) (Fig. 8). A male figuce, barely visible, about o cross the threshold rough 2 peculiar ‘opening inthe wall and play his part” But sis precisely at tie ‘threshold, slightly off cage, thatthe acto/intruder is most vulner- 6. Maller hue. View ofthe brary (dud pln of the main floable forthe window of a reading space looks down onto the back ‘ofhis neck. This house, traditionally considered to bethe prototype fof the Raunpan, also eonains the prototype ofthe theatre box In his wetngs on the question of th house, Locs describes arm ber of domestic miclodramas. In Das Andere, for example, he wrote: Try describe how bithand death the screams ofpainforan aborted son, the death atl of dying meter, th last tnoagis fs Young womsn 9 wishes die. -- unfold end usravel na room by Onc Jet an age the young woman ubo hs pat herselfwdest Shei yng the women for. One of her handel nods the sein revalver“On the tne 4 lester, the farewell ete. I the Yoom in which ths is happening of good tse? Whe wil ask tha? I sta tom" (One could aswell ask why itis only the women who dle andy and commit suicide. But, leaving aside the question forthe moment, {Loos is saying that the house must noc be conceived of as 2 work af at, that thre ise difforence between ahouse anda ‘series of decor- ted rooms". The house should be a stage for the theatre of the family, a place where people are born and live and dic. It is an environmen, or stage, whereas 8 work of srt presents itself 25 an object to a detached viewer, Tories to break down he conditn ofthe house as an object Loos radically convolutes the rolation between inside and outside One ofthe srategieshe uses is mirrors which, 2s Kenneth Frampton has pointed out, appear to be openings, and openings which can b> 7, Adof Lao lt, Verna, 1905, Vis from he ving room it the frplave nook top) Rafer house, Verna, 1922. Entrance othe ring room9. Sicner house, Viewna, 1910. View ofthe ing room, shoving the rirrr beneath the wine 10. Molter howe. View from the dining room ito the music rem an Diee versa Inthe cone af he tres ave ep ha! canbe let rr) mistaken for mirrors." Even more enigmatic is the placement, in the dining room of the Steiner house (Vienna, 1910) (Fig. 9), of a mirror just beneath an opaque window.” Here, again the window ‘is only a source of light. Placed at oye level, it return the gaze to the interior, tothe lamp above the dining table 2nd the objects onthe sideboard, recalling Freud's studi in Berggeste 19, where a small framed mistor hanging apains the window reflec the lamp on his ‘work table. In Freudian theory the mirror represents the psyche, thus the reflection in dhe micor is also sef-poriait projected on to the ouside word. The placement of Frexd's mirror on the bouné- ary between interior and exterior undermines the stats ofthe boure- ary asa fixed limit. Similarly, Loos's mirrors promote the interplay ‘between reality andilusion, between the acial and virtual, under~ mining the status of the boundary between inside and outside, ‘This ambiguity beswcen inside and ousid is intensified by the sepatstion of sight from the other sentes, Physitl and visual con- acetionsbetween the spaces in Loos'shouses are often separated. Ia the Rufer house 2 wide opening establishes erween the raised