Marc Antoine Laugier: An Essay On Architecture

Vitruvius also stresses on order, arrangement, eurhythmy, symmetry, propriety and economy and how architecture depends on these demands. This is not the case in today’s society. With advances in physics and construction sciences which allow buildings to be of asymmetrical shape and attain an abstract form directly places it in conflict with his stated ‘Eurhythmy’. To Vitruvius, all facets of architecture were to be in a state of complete harmony, as his views were so constrained towards the perfection of the human body. He described the various proportions of limbs and other body parts to be so accurately symmetrical and coordinated to meticulous detail. This perfection of the human body inspired architectural designs. In contemporary society, mainstream architecture has little to no correlation with the human body. It has been kept completely separate. Architectural inspiration today, more or less stems from everything outside the human, and looks towards a futuristic simplicity and sleek aesthetic that demands a different approach to the art of a building altogether. This commercial mindset has been influential since the engineering breakthroughs of the second millennium.

Although the man is talking about the house that he and his son are staying at at the moment, this is also talking about the world as a whole and it is telling about the life that they are experiencing. The passage has a

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.

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?

In his essay, Heidegger discusses the type of dwelling which is poetic in a sense. He then questions further that are the dwellings poetic in a true sense if yes then are other dwellings incompatible with the poetic ones? He further questions about the coexistence of the man’s social and historical life. For Heidegger, poetry is the things that let the man dwell and dwelling is through building. He believes that art of building is very much similar to the art of poetry. The way the verses in a poem depict a simple fact in a really creative way is same as that of the technique of constructing a building and then making the building alive by dwelling in that particular building. This philosophy of Heidegger is reflected in his architectural design sense that he connects the building styles with human life. This poem tends to remove the misconceptions that poems snatch away the realities of this world or poetry is mere fantasy but it’s not like that. Actually, poetry brings fantasy to life. Same as the opposing above and below and belonging to each other; the writer sees different contrasting things as

The human body is the ultimate tool for discovering the environment. Human anatomy is considered to be nature’s peak of perfection and certain features serve as inspiration for many architects. To study the relationship between the human body and architecture, one must not be limited to human body parts resemblance to architectural works but to a larger extent consider human emotions, sensory nerves, the mind and general human psychology. In essence everything that makes us human. In its simplest definition Architecture can be described as an art or practice of designing buildings. It is practiced in a way that accomplishes both practical and communicative or expressive requirements. To relate it to human body then Architecture can widely define the place, the site, the energy, the systems, the building, the flora and fauna. These components that bring aesthetic property to humanity apart from the utilitarian purpose it serves. The perfect balance of a normal human body and the proportions are incorporated into architecture from a point of view of imitation, idealized allusion and the actual human use. Evidence of such human incorporation into architecture is seen from the Ancient Greek Architectures where it was common for tower columns to take shape of a human being like in the colossus of the Ancient

The “Five Points of Modern Architecture” was a manifesto for architecture written in 1926 by Charles-Edouard Jeanerette – better known as Le Corbusier - emphasizing what he believed were five principles that any building meant to be modern should have. One building which exemplifies each of these points is Corbusier’s own Villa Savoye, built 1929-31 in Poissy, France. Corbusier’s first point of modern architecture is known as inclusion of ‘pilotis’. Pilotis refers to Corbusier’s innovative idea of a vertical support system used to hold the horizontal planes of a structure. In Villa Savoye, this can be clearly seen in both interior and exterior by the rounded pillars holding up the floors and roof, essentially elevating the home and

On his book on Modern Architecture, Curtis writes that modern architecture was faulted for it’s “supposed lack of ‘recognizable imagery’” towards the end of the 1970s. This statement supports the idea of Jencks’ double coding where architects must now make

Mies van der Rohe is one of the most prominent figures in modernist architectural history, the man who popularised some of the most influential phrases of the era, e.g. “less is more”, and strove to push his ideas and philosophies, not just on what he thought a building should be, but of what he thought architecture itself was. He changed the cityscape of America, showing the world a style that was simple and elegant, with such a controlled palette of expressions that shone through in its geometric beauty.

“Human houses should not be like boxes, blazing in the sun, nor should we outrage the Machine by trying to make dwelling places too complementary to Machinery. Any building for humane purposes should be an elemental, sympathetic feature of the ground, complementary to its nature-environment, belonging by kinship to the terrain.”

Architecture is often mistaken as purely an art form, when in actually it is where art and engineering or art and practicality meet. For example, painting is an art, when preformed well it yields a beautiful picture that evokes a deep human reaction and brings pleasure to its viewer, however this painting provides no function, it cannot shield us from the rain or protect us from the wind or snow, it is purely form. An insulated aluminum shed provides shelter and protection from Mother Nature; however, it is a purely functional building, it was drawn by an engineer, not conceived by an artist to have form. The culmination of form and function is Architecture, the Greeks and Romans fathered this idea and Palladio’s study of roman architecture taught him his valuable truth.

Different architects have different styles because they are trying to get at different things. Architecture is not just about making something beautiful anymore, it is about trying to get across a set of ideas about how we inhabit space. Two of the most famous architects of the twentieth century, one from each side, the early part and the later part up until today each designed a museum with money donated by the Guggenheim foundation. One of these is in New York City, it was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. The other is in bilbao, Spain, and it was designed by Frank Geary. My purpose of this paper is to interrogate each of these buildings, glorious for different reasons, to show how each architect was expressing their own style.

In relation to this the book ’Le Corbusier ‘by Kenneth Frampton (British architect, critic and historian, born: 20/11/1930) also holds a link within some of the opinions, movements and beliefs of Le Corbusier. Focusing from the early stages of Corbusier’s life to his last works, we find ourselves indulging in facts and creations of Corbusier himself such as the Dom-ino. As featured in the previous reading ‘towards a new architecture’ Corbusier talks about the engineers aesthetic ‘two things that march together and follow one from the other one at its full height, the other in an unhappy state of retrogression’. After some research in to this I was lead to the dom-ino design (image above). The dom –ino was an early example of the engineers aesthetic and became the theoretical basis of most of Corbusiers houses up to 1935 and extended on a scale much larger than the two story house. The dom-ino led to a number of prototype buildings such as the United De Habitation. The design allows the concept of the free facade, The pieces were to be pre-fabricated allowing the construction time of the design to be reduced and thereby a product of Corbusier’s application of

The five principles of architecture that Le Corbusier proposed in 1923 can be noted in, not only Le Corbusier’s work, but also in other modern architecture, because each principle contributes to the overall aesthetic of the building, as well as providing a functional use. However, all five principles don’t have to be incorporated into one design, which is what this essay will explore. It will attempt to show that one principle can prevail over the other four, but all five are needed to create a full representation of Le Corbusier’s envision of architecture. This is shown through Le Corbusier’s villas, specifically the Villa Shodhan and this essay will analyse how the principles contrast against one another. Furthermore, a small scale design project will be created alongside the essay in an attempt to produce a unique villa through the embodiment of Le Corbusier’s five principles of architecture. Through further analysis of the Villa Shodhan I will also argue that not all principles are independent and that some principles can function efficiently without the rest. Nonetheless, Le Corbusier’s most renowned villa, Villa Savoye, utilizes all five principles; therefore, it is the most accurate image of Le Corbusier’s five principles of architecture. However, after this villa had been completed it became clear that the flat roof, which served a domestic purpose as a roof garden had failed

Centered in the house is a ramp that takes you on a journey from the underbelly of the house on the ground floor to the main body on the first floor and then on to a roof garden. Throughout the house views of the surrounding nature are framed, your mind is free marvel, as the forms evoke a sense of exploration and delight. Villa Savoye is better experienced than viewed through an image, only then can you understand the greater meaning and purpose that informs its beauty. One might argue that this is not beautiful architecture and a poor example, however upon visiting this house you cannot deny that the house is beautiful in its own right, evoking a response from the occupant. Le Corbusier’s masterpiece is moving; therefore achieving what he believed architecture to be about. This experience and the emotion that is felt can only be described in words. Shapes play a big role in the architecture but clearly the meanings behind are more important.