A Simplistically Styled House by Heinrich Tessenow

2500 Words5 Pages

My aim is to investigate why Tessenow chooses to use such methods of design which are simplistic in style for his own house and how it relates to his other designs in terms of size and dimensions. I would like to see how Tessenow’s work compares to that of other European architects, if there any links, or if Tessenow followed or started any trends in German architecture. But primarily i will focus on the use of space and seeing whether there is a barrier between public and private space or not. I would like to explore how the building affects the user, whether it possesses emotional interfaces, which in turn influence people differently.

Heinrich Tessenow was born in 1876 and died in 1950, he was a German architect, a professor and an urban planner, and worked during the time of the Weimar Republic. The Weimar Republic was the parliament in Germany which was soon superseded by the German Reich. This republic lasted fourteen years. Tessenow is considered to be one of the most important personalities in German architecture during the Weimar Period. According to one of Tessenow’s apprentice’s, Heinrich was renowned for saying: ‘...The simplest form is not always the best, but the best is always simple...’ (Refer to bibliography)

Tessenow designed this house for himself and his lady friend who was a music teacher, Chilla Schlichter in 1930.The external elevations of the house are venaculer in design as the house show traits which echo back to themes which had been developed within the German quarter, Hellerau. The house itself is moderately small and is based on a cubic shape, with a limited amount of openings in the walls; the first floor space is within the roof space, meaning lowered ceilings and reduced living space. Consequent...

... middle of paper ...

...g drive way which is surrounded by trees. Venturi’s idea was to have a vibrant house, for the inhabitants although, for it to still be secluded and away from the public.

It is fascinating to compare how Herzog and De Meuron both embrace the idea of functional art being public, this is probably down to the development of architecture and how buildings are not solely functional but are also forms of art. Tessenow would probably have followed suite, to embrace the idea of his works being public, rather than them being privatised buildings, if he was born later on in the century, although it is with gratitude to Tessenow and other European architects that modernist architecture has become fit for public viewing. On reflection even if these architects wanted to react to modernist architecture especially Tessenow, they still made designs which are truthful to modernism.

Open Document