This page was created by Jaclyn Legge. The last update was by Maegen Sargent.
The Role of Architecture
The story of the National Gallery's architecture is characterized by a series of disagreements between Safdie, who was a controversial choice due to his strong opinions against various periods in art history, and the curators and artists involved in the architectural programme. The disagreements predominantly involved the presence of natural light and the prominence of the architecture. However, a lot of Safdie's influence made it through this difficult process and into the gallery, as “the route itself is structured...in a way that continues to challenge the building’s primary investment in art” (Ord, 27). Although “the ideal gallery subtracts from the artwork all cues that interfere with the fact that it is ‘art’” (O’Doherty, 14), it was difficult for Safdie to come to a compromise as he is ultimately a lover of architecture before art. The compromise that was reached involved reduced courtyard spaces, the ability to block out the skylights he was very adamant on, and a minimal inclusion of architectural detail (Sutherland Boggs, 202). What was most important was that the architecture could not distract from the art. This plays out in the galleries, with their high, spacious ceilings and strong colour choices to complement the galleries. With the Water Court, Safdie resigns to these compromises but is able to express himself fully nonetheless.
The Water Court is a space where one feels as if they are stepping into the carved sanctuary of a temple, with its floor-to-ceiling tiles and matching benches. The simplicity of the architecture maximizes elegance and the sweeping ceiling sends the visitor’s eye swooping upwards, adding to the effect of the ‘ascent.’ It is by breaking down a space into basic 'building block' shapes and focusing on order and harmony that the simplistic architectural whole of the Water Court “emerges as more than the sum of individual parts” (Safdie, 9) while pleasing the curators’ demands to keep the architectural interest minimal.
The Water Court also highlights Safdie’s taste for “an intense focus on the interaction between space and light” (Safdie, 139), which also worried those collaborating with him in the design of the National Gallery. Wherever skylights or peeks into the outside world were introduced in the gallery space, there was push-back for Safdie, who persevered. Because the Water Court is only accessible through other first-floor galleries, which do not have skylights, it has the effect of ‘reacquainting’ the visitor with the world outdoors. The Water Court’s skylights create a crack of sky above the Court that has a completely different effect depending on the time of one's visit. During the day, the Water Court is bright, streaming with rays of light or matte paper-white overcast; from inside the galleries, the light draws the visitors’ attention back. At night, the Water Court is dim and mystical, a place to rest the eyes from the artificial light of the gallery, which nonetheless beckons warmly to the visitor in repose. In both cases, the Water Court is an inviting tranquility from whatever route the visitor has taken thus far, which is at least the length of four exhibit spaces.
The ultimate function the Water Court serves would have soothed curatorial worries: as a place of contemplative repose from the galleries, the Water Court is as simply composed as it could be, coming from an architect whose heart is with architecture, not the art. The presence of the Water Court does not distract from the art in the galleries surrounding it, nor from the carefully curated pieces that are in the Court. Instead, its sense of order and symmetry, bolstered by the distant presence of the outdoors and the gentle ripples of the glass-bottomed pool, makes it a satisfying place to stop and refresh one's eyes before continuing through the Gallery.