Influence Of American Industrialization On The Projects Of Le Corbusier

In A Home Is Not a House, Reyner Banham starts by arguing that the main function of the typic American house is to cover its mechanical structure. In fact, he states that the use of mechanical services in architectural practice varies constantly because mechanical services are considered to be new in the profession, as well as, a cultural threat to the architect’s position in the world. To show his argument, Banham states that American houses are basically large single spaces divided by partitions inside that give a relative importance to the use of internal mechanical services, causing a threat to the need of architectural design. Similarly, American cultural characteristics, like cleanliness and hygiene, also foster the use and need of mechanical

American postmodern architecture has more focus on culture, the specific theme of that moment, but the problem of formalization started to show up. Deconstructivism, a critical architectural movement in the postmodern age, usually has nice control on the structural surface as the building’s skin and use the randomly geometric shapes to show the twisting architectural elements.

Architecture should not be separated from the political and social life of human-beings. On the contrary, “throughout the history, architects have always been involved to some extent in politics, and have a nearly always sought positions of power and influence’’. Communist ideology in the Soviet Union had a huge impact on the architectural development of many modern nations: Russia, Ukraine, Belorussia, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Uzbekistan, Tadzhikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Bulgaria, Romania, Georgia, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Moldova and Azerbaijan. The amount of affected countries makes the topic of my analysis relevant and worth-discussing. My essay will be structured in a following way. I argue that communist ideology had an

Question 1. Choose an architect or practice whose work is covered by or relevant to this course and discuss critically one or more of their design projects or drawings or urban proposals as precedent case-studies. Selectively situate this work in relation to their body of work, and against the practices and concerns of the period. Focus on the architectural qualities of a specific key aspect of the design of the projects. Selectively consider how they might relate to the historical situation, cultural values, theoretical concerns and design practices of the time. This may involve a selective analysis of compositional design practices, material fabrication production and the experiential reception of built outcomes of the projects.

This essay will focus on how those works are informed by both regional and international course. In this context, Sydney Ancher and his strong Miesian simplicity as well as Peter Muller’s affinity with Frank Lloyd Wright’s organic architecture principle.

The eighteenth-century city was a place in which actual physical space was subjected to a complex mental layering of conceptual spaces, focusing on the design theory of architects as Boullee and Durand, with his charts. Which legacy was continued later on through the architecture of Paul Philippe Cret, Frank Lloyd Wright and Louis Kahn, some of the most outstanding modern architects of 18th-19th century. Furthermore, distinctive features of neoclassicism and outlines

Leon Krier was criticised for publishing a costly monograph on Albert Speer’s architecture (1985)in which, while acknowledging the crimes of the Nazis and the man, Krier nonetheless claimed the book’s only subject and sole justification was “Classical architecture and the passion of building” (cited by Jaskot, ‘Architecture of Oppression’, 2000). Discuss this claim, the controversy and the issues (historical, philosophical and ethical and possibly others) they raise. Can architecture, Classical, Modern or otherwise, be autonomous from politics and valued independently of the circumstances of politics and history that adhere to it?

To fully appreciate the differences and similarities between Postmodernism and Modernism, it is required to understand exactly what they are. Modernism is the term we give to the accumulated creations and activities of designers in the early 20th century, who had the theory that traditional forms of literature, religion, social organization, and most of all, art and architecture, had become outdated in the new social, political, and economic environment of a fully industrialised world. One of the main characteristics of Modernism is self-consciousness, which typically caused exstensive experimentations of form and function. The creative process of generating work was also explored, forming new techniques in design. Modernism rejected all ideology of realism and prefers to reference and parody works of the past. Postmodernism, on the other hand, is a radical rejection of Modernist design. Taking place in the late 20th century, it is a movement in art, criticism, and architecture that disputes the majority of modernist tendencies. The Postmodernist analysis of society and culture lead to the expansion of critical theory and advanced the works of architecture, literature, and design. This entire re-evaluation of the western value system of popular culture, love, marriage, economy, that took place from the 1950s and 60s, leading to the peak of the Social Revolution in 1968, is commonly referred as Postmodernity which influenced postmodern thought, as opposed to the term

Postmodernism is a universal movement, present in every art and discipline. In architecture, postmodernism is precise as well as ambiguous thereby in need of an explorative pursuit for a consensus of what is meant by the movement in this perspective - between the works of Charles Jencks, a primary theorist of this architectural turn; Heinrich Klotz, a leading architectural critic; and William Curtis, an architectural historian. The progression of this paper is highly influenced with Jencks’ studies as his works are often times referenced as well by both Klotz and Curtis in their individual interpretations and further accompanied with either supporting statements or contradictions.

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.

Although, most post-modernist architects had been associated with modern architects in terms of training during the twentieth century, they refused most their teachers ideas. In addition, today's architects cannot deny the modern architecture ways of designing any building. Their design, for instance, has many philosophical meaning such as constructional, environmental, sociological, commercial and metaphorical meaning.

Gropius traces the growth of the New Architecture and the work of the now well-known Bauhaus, with accuracy, calls for a new artist and architect educated to new materials and approaches as well as meeting the requirements of the age. It is also mentioned in The New Architecture and the Bauhaus that the intention of the Bauhaus was not to reproduce any “style”, system or belief, but simply to exert a revitalizing impact on design. Even though the outward forms of the New Architecture differ primarily in an organic sense from the old, it is the inevitable logical product of the intellectual, social and technical conditions of our age. A gap has been made with the past, allowing us to face a new aspect of architecture corresponding to the technical civilization of the age we live in. The analysis of the dead styles has been destroyed. Furthermore, the new building throws open the walls like curtains to allow an abundance of fresh air, daylight and sunshine. Instead of securing the building ponderously into the ground, it poises them lightly, yet firmly at the same

“Wright and Le Corbusier seem predestined for comparison. Their ideal cities confront each other as two opposing variations on the same utopian theme” (Fishman, 163). Charles-Édouard Jeanneret-Gris, more commonly known as Le Corbusier (October 6, 1887 – August 27, 1965), was a Swiss-French architect, designer, painter, urban planner, and writer. Throughout his life, he was a pioneer of modern architecture and city planning (Frampton, 12). One of Le Corbusier’s contemporaries was also hugely influential but with a competing plan Frank

“Architecture or Revolution?” in Le Corbusier’s belief was the only way to avoid class-based revolution in industrialized architecture (Quirk, 2012). Le Corbusier, born Charles Édouard Jeanneret, was born into an artistic family in 1877 in a small village in Switzerland. His mother was a pianist and his father was a designer of watch dials. Even though he learned piano and father’s trade he got interested in the architecture when he was 13 years old. He learned from L’Eplatenier, a teacher in La Chaaux-de-Fund. His teacher opened his eyes and led him to the direct observation of life. He was an instinctive genius by turning older building designs into newer more modern designs. Le Corbusier is one of the most significant architecture’s of the 20th century, and one who led architecture to the modern era.

We need only think of modern architecture long-standing identification with steel and glass as well as with concrete to recall that entire categories of architectural production and their attendant ideologies have frequently been defined in relations to the use of materials from 1950 to 1966 Eero Saarinen and Associates contribute more than its share of Innovations to this realm. Therefore as we consider the career of Eero Saarinen historical perspective, it seems important to ask a simple question: what is material? During the age of modernism Mies Van Der Rode said “less is more.” While observing the Eero Saarinen