These are the years I was extremely fortunate to attend the University of Oklahoma School of Architecture, because it led to my meeting and coming under the influence of Bruce Goff. Mr. Goff, or BG as he was called by his students, was the dean of the architectural school from 1949 to 1956. When I attended OU, his influence was still extremely strong there, and it was this influence that immediately excited and fired my initial interest and passion for architecture. When he came to lecture, I quickly gravitated to him and began visiting him periodically in Kansas City, Missouri, where he was practicing architecture at the time. He was, by nature, always a caring and giving person. He was never condescending or aloof and would always make you feel at ease, even as you realized you were but a lowly student, and he was this incredible architect. He was well known in artistic circles and was always being visited by other creative people, as well as students, like myself. I was very fortunate, indeed, to have the opportunity to know him and learn from him.

The OU school of architecture under BG's guidance was like no school of architecture before or since. And although it was a curriculum for "learning", as was definitely needed to become an architect, BG's approach was based upon the belief that each of us has unique qualities that can be expressed in a unique aesthetic self-expression. He felt that it was the goal of every artist, in this case, student, to find, explore, and develop his intrinsic aesthetics. BG liked to call this achievement of creative self-expression, "Kebyar", which was a Balinese term for "a flowering forth". The ideal of the school of architecture was, therefore, not "who was better", or "I want mine to be like his", but rather "I've done something special here for no other reason than it's mine", and "I like mine, but I want to develop it further, much further". The ideal was not competition, but equals, each striving to proceed along his own particular aesthetic path.

The method required for the student to gradually beginning finding his own aesthetics was that it must evolve from within. BG's efforts, therefore, were based on his desire to help you facilitate that process. To do this he did not "teach" by criticizing the student's work, showing him how you could improve it. Instead, he would continually offer positive reinforcement by showing the student how much better his design was than even he might have thought it was. As this process continued, students began to develop self-confidence in their intrinsic ability and began to express what came naturally. Because of this, the student work done at this time exhibited a wide range of aesthetic diversity and a great deal of creativity. The atmosphere at OU during this time was heady with enthusiasm and excitement, as students would marvel at what they, and their fellow students, were accomplishing.

Foremost in BG’s mind was the desire that architectural aesthetics and concepts be continually evolved and new horizons reached. One of his favorites quotes was, I believe, by Claude Debussy, "Onward to uncharted shores." In the hopes of facilitating this exploration in his students, BG created a course that used various abstract terms, some from music, some from architecture, that defined the elements of aesthetic composition. The idea was that by first studying the concept, as well as, numerous aesthetic examples of each term, the student would gain new perceptions pertaining to the qualities and aesthetic possibilities of each of these elements of composition. That would, in turn, begin to enable him to imagine the components of architecture in new conceptual and aesthetic ways.

As part of these studies, the student would also do abstract compositions meant to express the concept of each term. The abstract nature of these compositions, and in many cases, the influence of the various examples studied, was another process BG used to help the student develop his own original aesthetic idiom. The student's initial aesthetic elements could be explored, and as they were further developed, they could eventually be transferred from purely abstract aesthetics to applied architectural relevancy.

BELOW IS A LINK TO The Abstract Terms of Aesthetic Composition and The Method for Their Use

To some extent, the OU school of architecture might be thought of as conceptually aligned with Frank Lloyd Wright and the organic approach to architectural design. And though Mr. Goff knew Mr. Wright quite well, and invited him to lecture at the school often, the concept of "organic", as it was practiced at OU, was not limited to the just the aesthetics and ideas of Mr. Wright. This was facilitated by the fact that BG's perspective was not limited by his admiration of Wright, and as such, he continually infused the school of architecture with the aesthetics of an extremely wide range of musical composers, painters, and architects, besides Wright, himself. This was another aspect of the OU school of architecture that set it apart from other schools of architecture. Aesthetic beauty of enumerable types and styles were a constant part of the student's environment.

In the summer of 1965, I was able to apprentice with BG in Kansas City. Every night I would enter his world of beauty and aesthetics. We would listen to music, discuss all sorts of topics, learn his opinions about other artists and architects, do compositions. It was relentless and continual – that was his existence – he was always “in” what he loved. Needless to say the experience was overwhelming and extremely beneficial to me and my desire to create. He instilled in me a confidence to accept what was different and unique about my aesthetics and concepts. He instilled in me the desire to take chances and push the aesthetic limits of my designs. He instilled in me the belief that no one has the capacity to criticize my work – it is what it is, and it is mine.

As architect and painter, his imagination knew no bounds. And though his completed projects and the renderings of his un-built projects were things of beauty, they only hint at the extent of his creative imagination. BG had a concept of a type of architecture that was strictly an architectonic composition with no function other than that it be experienced. He called this Absolute Architecture. I feel his creative imagination could only have been truly actualized by this type of architecture.

Above all BG embodied the ideal of Creativity, and it’s manifestation of creative self-expression. BG’s ego was this ideal. From his architecture, to his paintings, to his inspirational teaching method, he expressed it, he taught it, he lived it.

Soon after BG passed away in 1982, Jack Golden, a former student of Mr. Goff's at Univ. of Oklahoma, developed a network of his former students and apprentices. He named it "Friends of Kebyar" (FOK). It has continued to grow into an international group of those interested in Mr. Goff, his work, and the ideal of creative, organic architecture.

www.kebyar.com          


- Let me offer the following thought concerning the value of studying the terms listed below:

To know Bruce Goff was to know how much he loved architecture. It was also to realize what a vast imagination he had, and how little of it was used in the architecture that was actually built. Few of those designs came close to what he was capable of doing. Imagine how he must have felt - so much potential not put to use. I mean, this was his whole life, not just his profession, and to not be able to do what he loved to the extent of his capabilities, had to be a great sorrow. Yet, I never saw BG depressed or angry or defeated. He was always positive and enthused. I feel this was in good part because, no matter how much he loved architecture and seeing his architecture built, what was all the more vital to him, was his love for creativity and to give expression to that love by creating. That he did - continually! Beyond the joy he experienced by simply creating his architectural designs, whether built or not, he was also able to find aesthetic self-expression by doing his paintings. He could also find gratification by seeing how his teaching facilitated individual self-expression in so many of his students. Added to these was his pure joy in experiencing the beauty created by others, in particular music. All of these gave meaning and a sense of fulfillment to his life that compensated for what the practice of architecture might not have satisfied. And because of that, the realities of the architectural profession and its incredible number of obstacles, if I might opine, barely fazed him.

So it should be understood that the real value of loving creating, even when it can't be used for others, is to use it for yourself. That is reason enough to enjoy studying and applying the following concepts of design. So what needs to be understood is that what's offered here is also an alternate approach for pursuing aesthetic self-expression, irrespective of an architectural practice. Because it is usually impossible to express the love of architecture in the throes of an architectural practice, doing compositions, or art of any sort that is completely under your own control, can be an outlet for that love.