|
The main changes introduced by Klarwein in the plans after May 1962 were in the plenary
hall, the state hall (the Chagall hall), the external columns and the roof. Among the
photographs received from Gillitt there are a few of models of these elements before
Klarwein's changes. In the last resort Klarwein got his way with regards to the columns and
roof, succeeded only partially in the Chagall hall, and even though he managed to cancel
the original plan for the plenary hall, it was not his plan, but Dora Gad's plan that was finally
realized.10
The Plenary Hall
The original plan for the plenary hall, in the preparation of which Jerusalem architect Ze`ev
Rabina had participated,11 and a model of which was prepared by Gillitt (See photograph),
included a hanging ceiling, a small balcony on the left side of the front wall for the
President, seats for the Members of the Knesset separated by many passages, and one
long Government table in the middle, similar to the one that had been situated in the old
Knesset plenary hall in the Flumin building (See photograph). The plan also foresaw a
single gallery, without a separation between important guests and the general public.
 |
| A model of the original plan for the plenary hall, with the President’s balcony on the left. Photographer: Bill Gillitt
|
 |
| A model of the original plan for the plenary hall: a view in the direction of the galleries, without a partition, and with hanging ceiling. Photographer: Bill Gillitt
|
Klarwein did away with the hanging ceiling, to which he referred in contempt as "interior
architecture", and he decided that the ceiling should be constructed of bare concrete.12
According to Ruegg, this created a problem because "how can one place a single ceiling
on a shape that is to polygonal, like this hall? Klarwein created a vault up above, and wanted
it to remain open. He also planned, lower down, another level of horizontal cement, in order
to get the wall to end somewhere. But the acoustics were terrible". Finally, this plan was
not adopted, and after Dora Gad entered the picture, the hanging ceiling was returned, but
in a different shape than that originally foreseen.13 The balcony for the President was
cancelled because Danny Karavan, who planned the front wall of the plenary hall, objected.14
Gad made changes regarding the furniture for the plenary hall, and the important visitors'
gallery was separated from that for the general public by means of bulletproof glass, for
security reasons.
In the original article it was pointed out that at an early stage it had been suggested that
the front wall in the plenary hall be adorned with phrases from the bible.15 It transpires that
before the idea was finally discarded several experiments were made to cut words in stone
in various styles. The stones on which the words were cut ended up in Segal's back yard in
the Beit Hakerem neighborhood of Jerusalem.
The Gallery in the Chagall Hall
The original plan for the state hall included a gallery, that was to have surrounded the wall
opposite the Chagall tapestries, and the wall facing South (See photograph).
 |
| A model of the gallery for visitors, planned for the Chagall Hall. Photographer: Bill Gillitt
|
From the point where there are several stairs going down from the level of the main entrance into the
Chagall hall, there should have been stairs going up to the gallery. The three to four meter
wide gallery, was to have been built above the line of the windows in the state hall, and join
the upper part of the plenary hall, at the point where the President's balcony had been
planned. In the gallery itself sitting corners, and meeting spaces were planned for Members
of the Knesset and their guests. In addition to the practical function of offering comfortable
seating arrangements for the Members and their guests, the gallery also had an aesthetic
function - to break the strong light that enters through the halls’ windows, and is reflected
back from the marble floor.16 Klarwein, who liked high ceilings and natural lighting (which
was why he had sought to cancel the hanging ceiling in the plenary hall), decided at the
beginning of 1963 to cancel the gallery in the state hall. According to Ruegg, this also
resulted from the fact that the function of the meeting place was not clear. Since no special
area had been allocated for Members’ meetings with their guests, and, as noted above, no
personal rooms had been planned for the Members, once the building was inaugurated the
Members' dining room soon turned into the preferred meeting place.
The Roof and the External Columns
According to the original plan, as it was formulated in 1961, the external columns, which
support the roof, were to have been rectangular, widening inwards between two links to the
external wall, and then growing narrow again as they approached the roof. The connection
of the columns with the roof was in the form of upside-down pyramids - not of mushrooms,
as Ram Karmi had claimed in his interview with the author.17
In the new plan, which Klarwein completed after Gillitt’s departure, the rectangular
columns remained straight for three quarters of the way upwards, and widen outwards only
in their upper part. (See photograph)
 |
|
 |
| A model of the columns as originally planned. Photographer: Bill Gillitt
|
|
The external wall with the columns, as constructed |
Klarwein added another layer of cement to the roof,
and cut down the protrusion of the roof. In the original plan the roof was to have protruded
by two meters,18 and thus created shading. The lower links of the columns to the walls were
to have continued into the building on its Western and Southern sides, as support boards
for the gallery floor in the state hall. (See photograph) Both Ruegg and Segal mentioned
that the outer walls of the building, between the fourth and fifth floors, which are covered
with red stone (Mizi Yehudi Malwan), actually hang on the columns, and do not rest on the
ceiling of the third floor (the floor of the fourth floor). As to the stone, with which the outer
walls of the building are covered, even though approval was given to use the stone found in
the foundations,19 finally the stone was brought from the Galilee, because in order to prepare
the ground for the building’s foundations it was necessary to blow up the stone on the
locations, and was no longer possible to cut it.20
10 See the original article.
11 Ibid.
12 Interview held by the writer with Hans Ruegg, December 1, 2000.
13 See original article.
14 Ibid. p, 151.
15 Ibid.
16 Explanations provided by both Gillitt and Ruegg in their interviews with the author.
17 See my original article p. 147
18 In the interview with the author, Gillitt used the English term “over-hang”.
19 See the original article.
20 Interview held by the writer with Segal, November 13, 2000. Stones designated for cutting must be sawed, since using explosives cracks them.
Continued...
© Copyright 2006, The State of Israel. All Rights Reserved.
We welcome your Suggestions and Comments.
Email: feedback@knesset.gov.il
|
