The ' Verchimelungsmaifest Gegen Den Rationalismus Der Architektur

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

As modern architecture had not allowed the expression of contradictions, but in deconstructive buildings, there are different spaces intersecting one another in irregular ways. This is an attempt to reveal the character of each and every space, and the relationship in between of the occasional conflict and coincidence.

The first rationalist tenet that Thomas Paine demonstrates is that liberty and freedom are God-given inalienable rights. In The Crisis,

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 the process of the good spatial generation, architects are representatives of institutional knowledge and ‘the captain of the ship’. They have power and control over designing and production of space either directly by taking part in this process via their personal practices or indirectly affecting it through their professional organizations they work for. This is where the role of professional ethics in architecture comes to play and they should be limiting and leading this power through describing architect’s social responsibilities and also should be preventing unethical attitudes in all kinds of spatial practices by using this power and knowledge. (“What is the Social Responsibility of Architects?”, 2010)

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

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.

This book was written by Juhani Pallasmaa with regard to ‘Polemics’, on issues that were part of the architecture discourse of the time, i.e. 1995. It is also an extending of ideas expressed in an essay entitled “Architecture of the seven senses” published in 1994.

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.

James Stirling, who is famous for untraditional design and rejecting functionalism, designed Florey Building of Oxford University in 1966. The building presented the idea of Brutalism, focused on the form beauty of itself. Alvar Aalto, an architect sparkplugged the theory of humanism and functionalism, designed Baker House of MIT in 1947. For him, functionality is an important way to provide harmonious life for human being. These two buildings with different styles were both designed as the student dormitory for university, however, some similarities still can be found. This essay will compare the differences and similarities about relationship between form and surroundings, function and circulation, and material expressing of them.

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

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.

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

“In all my works, light is an important controlling factor,” says Ando. “I create enclosed spaces mainly by means of thick concrete walls. The primary reason is to create a place for the individual, a zone for oneself within society. When the external factors of a city’s environment require the wall to be without openings, the interior must be especially full and satisfying.” And further on the subject of walls, Ando writes, “At times walls manifest a power that borders on the violent. They have the power to divide space, transfigure place, and create new domains. Walls are the most basic elements of architecture, but they can also be the most enriching.”

Architecture can be viewed with two different types of properties. Properties that can be seen like shapes, their composition, the spaces they create and, the colours and textures that make up their appearance. These properties are considered to be visual while other properties are considered to be abstract. These properties can only be described using words; the meanings behind the architecture and the stories that can be told about it. The context, its cultural background and its function also affects how we view architecture. The question is, what