5. Atmosphere and the concrete practice of building
Everyday experience tells us that different actions need different environments to take place in a satisfactory way. This fact is of course taken into consideration by current theory of planning and architecture, but so far the problem has been treated in a too abstract way. ‘Taking place’ is usually understood in a quantitative, functional sense with implications such as spatial distribution and dimensioning. But inter-human functions are not similar everywhere, they take place in very different ways and demand places with different properties, in accordance with different cultural traditions and different environmental conditions.
As happened in the early Functionalism, places cannot be
…show more content…
Conclusion
“What do we mean when we speak of architectural quality? Quality in architecture […] is to me when a building manages to move me. What on earth is it that moves me? How can I get it into my own work? […] How do people design things with such a beautiful, natural presence, things that move me every single time. On word for it is Atmosphere”
Remarkably, unlike in the description of art or music, the notion of atmosphere remains largely unaddressed in architecture. Atmosphere, can be argued, is the very initial and immediate experience of space and can be understood as a notion that addresses architectural quality, but the discussion of atmosphere in architecture will always entail, by definition, a certain ambiguity. After all, atmosphere is something personal, vague, ephemeral and difficult to capture in text or design, impossible to define or analyse. Atmosphere, Mark Wigley says, “evades analysis, it’s not easily defined, constructed or controlled”.
To conclude, atmosphere exists where architecture, beyond its technical apparatus and its programmatic approach, manage to create such a strong connection bridging the gap between professionals and users, that the whole is held together by the constancy of an emotional atmosphere to be shared and
But these contrived differences give rise to esthetic difficulties too. Because inherent differences—those that come from genuinely differing uses—are lacking among the buildings and their settings, the contrivances repre...
Using the quote by Habermas as a starting point, select up to two buildings designed in the twentieth century and examine what ‘sudden, shocking encounters’ they have encountered, or created. Analyse the building’s meanings as a demonstration of an avant-garde, or potentially arriere-garde, position.
“Form follows function.” Every great Modern architect thought, designed by and breathed these very words. Or at least, their design principles evolved from them. Modern architects Le Corbusier, Mies van der Rohe, Frank Lloyd Wright, Pierre Chareau, and Rudolf Schindler to name a few believed that the function determined the space whether the space was solely for a particular purpose or they overlapped to allow for multiple uses. Form didn’t just follow function, function defined the space. By focusing on the relationship between the architecture and the interior elements, Chareau’s Maison de Verre expanded the idea of functionalism to include not only the architecture but also the space it creates and how people function within that space.
Materiality is a critical feature in all of his projects, and in this case, the architect did not only blend the building with the landscape, by sinking it carefully into the slope, but he also uses genuine local materials to give the space atmospheric ideals. Always working towards a consistent visual appearance, Zumthor uses this quality factor in the interior building method. Using a system of specifically, almost scientifically, arrangem...
Hovering above are pillars of concrete and stone. Its rise and collapse determined by history. A combination of art and science designed to create notorious architecture. The necessity for architecture is distant from extinction and continuously transforming itself with the duration of time creating innovative methods of portraying scenic and functional works of art. The Romans and Greeks established a foundation for architecture that maintains its reputation as remarkable acts of beauty.
In 19th century art, architecture and literature specific spaces such as the attic, studies and private garden were perceived as places of imagination and contemplation within a home. There is no one meaning to the term ‘space’ and throughout time and with the evolution of literature and architecture, space can be seen and understood in many different ways. It can be as literal as erecting walls and a roof creating a surrounded space or in the way Gaston Bachelard in ‘the poetics of space’ so deeply analysis, that it is our own creative minds and imagination in which we create intimate spaces. The house becomes a home from those who inhabit it. In Gilbert and Gubars ‘The mad women in the attic’ and ‘The Yellow wallpaper” by charlotte Perkins
The essence of modern architecture lays in a remarkable strives to reconcile the core principles of architectural design with rapid technological advancement and the modernization of society. However, it took “the form of numerous movements, schools of design, and architectural styles, some in tension with one another, and often equally defying such classification, to establish modernism as a distinctive architectural movement” (Robinson and Foell). Although, the narrower concept of modernism in architecture is broadly characterized by simplification of form and subtraction of ornament from the structure and theme of the building, meaning that the result of design should derive directly from its purpose; the visual expression of the structure, particularly the visual importance of the horizontal and vertical lines typical for the International Style modernism, the use of industrially-produced materials and adaptation of the machine aesthetic, as well as the truth to materials concept, meaning that the true nat...
Frank Lloyd Wright has been called “one of the greatest American architect as well as an Art dealer that produced a numerous buildings, including houses, resorts, gardens, office buildings, churches, banks and museums. Wright was the first architect that pursues a philosophy of truly organic architecture that responds to the symphonies and harmonies in human habitats to their natural world. He was the apprentice of “father of Modernism” Louis Sullivan, and he was also one of the most influential architects on 20th century in America, Wright is idealist with the use of elemental theme and nature materials (stone, wood, and water), the use of sky and prairie, as well as the use of geometrical lines in his buildings planning. He also defined a building as ‘being appropriate to place’ if it is in harmony with its natural environment, with the landscape (Larkin and Brooks, 1993).
‘Through identifying places and organizing them, we make sense of the world we inhibit’ (Unwin,
True architects are needed to create architectural beauty and they do so by using “elements which are capable of affecting our senses, and of rewarding the desire of our eyes...the sight of them affects us immediately” (16). Le Corbusier’s says that we must standardize architecture with respect to function so that we can mass produce it until we perfect its aesthetic through competition and innovation. Le Corbusier believed that Architecture schools weren’t teaching students correctly and that engineers would be the ones who save architecture. Architecture is a thing of plastic emotion. “It should use elements capable of striking our senses, of satisfying our visual desires…arranging them in a way that the sight of them clearly affects
Jencks believes “the glass-and-steel box has become the single most used form in Modern Architecture and it signifies throughout the world ‘office building’” (27). Thus, modern architecture is univalent in terms of form, in other words it is designed around one out of a few basic values using a limited number of materials and right angles. In...
People are made of complexities and contradictions. Venturi recognized that buildings should be complex and complicated, too. He theorized and built buildings inspired by this principle, and succeeded because of his emphasis on individual experience and the interaction between humanity and architectural forms. In pursuit of this goal, his pluralist and revolutionary style of architecture embraced difference and ambiguity and rejected the rigid rules of modernism. While undoubtedly influenced by Venturi’s ideas, later postmodern architects failed to live up to his principles by forming their own inflexible rules and not concentrating on the human experience with buildings.
I believe that a better understanding of our basic human sensibilities is key to designing buildings of lasting resonance. The following discussion looks to the beginnings of architecture for its groundwork, namely through the reconsideration of the the ‘Cave’ typology. It seeks to tease out its latent spatial qualities as well as our innate cognitive responses and expectations of this environment, through it remedying the current design approach that is increasingly prospect
In Laugier’s book, “An Essay on Architecture,” he addresses early architects’ ignorance. Laugier explains how architects did not study nature and the set rules nature has already created for us. In his Essay, he reveals the flaws that many early buildings throughout Europe posses. Some of the more general flaws he exposes are disproportioning in architectural design, unnecessary placement, and ignoring the primitive and original purpose of a building all together. Therefore, Laugier believes appropriate and appealing architecture can only be designed and crafted when the architect behind the building has followed the rules of nature.
As Nuttgens eloquently expressed, architecture is a “vital…expression of the experience of mankind.” It is more than just buildings used for storage, housing, religious purposes, simple functionality; it is a great manifestation of the commonality of man, the great connecting factor of humankind. However, it can be argued that the ancient and classic forms or architecture are in essence more “profound…lasting… [and] inexhaustible” than those of their modern counterparts, because of some key differences in the ways ancient and modern architecture are practiced.