Rem Koolhaas, Daniel Liebeskind, Frank Gehry and Zaha Hadid. Modern day ‘starchitects’ who - through their practice of deconstructivist architecture - have heavily influenced the overall approach to today’s architecture. But what exactly is deconstructivist architecture? Is it a derivative of postmodernist principles, or something of its own entirety? Through the analysis of particular modern day architects and their works, deconstructivism ascertains its emergence as a separate architectural form that contrasts with and challenges postmodern design principles.
Deconstructivism can be characterised as an external design principle developed and evolved from postmodernist architecture. Deriving its philosophy from the works of controversial
…show more content…
Deconstructivist architecture is more often than not perceived to be an extension of postmodernist design principles. However, through the works of modern day architects such as Zaha Hadid and Daniel Liebeskind, deconstructivist architecture separates itself from postmodernism via structural geometry and physicality. Postmodernist architecture concerns itself with the usability of a structure first and foremost – with the building’s aestheticism becoming an afterthought. This heavily contrasts with the philosophy of deconstructivism, as the structure’s appearance takes primary focus.
This deconstructivist philosophy is represented in Zaha Hadid’s Beko Building. The structural properties of the building defy the architectural norm through the randomness of the building’s shape. As is displayed in the building’s site plan the structure takes on an irregular ‘water-droplet’ form - comprised of multiple layers and storeys- that highlight the importance of form rather than function.
The building focuses on its envelope as the structure’s identifying feature with the overall usability seamlessly fitting with the buildings irregularity of geometry. The use of non-rectilinear shapes allow for the shape to question the laws of physics yet simultaneously follow them in order to create a structure that is atypical to the standard polygonal shape.
In contrast postmodernist structures – such as the Cube Tube by SAKO Architects - adhere to the norms of
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.
Frank Gehry’s deconstructivism evolution is showcased by the use of non-traditional materials, conscientious detail to the building’s intended use which elevates his architecture into
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
Architecture should be nurturing, responsive and alive, dynamically shifting spatial balances, organically expressive forms, subtly luminous colors and biologically healthy. To achieve such life-enhancing architecture, it has to address all the body senses simultaneously and fuse our image of self with experience of the world. By strengthening our sense of self and reality, architecture serves its all-important function of accommodation and
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.
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.
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
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 entryways of the building come from four different sides and meet in the middle. The overall shape of the building creates different views and facades. The building was not created just on the looks of it; it is made up of a three dimensional, stimulating, tactile human thing.
This essay will critically discuss the development of Post Modernism as a reaction to Modernism and the growth of the architectural style as an individual movement.
The book consists of twelve chapters that propose this idea that designers should explore the nature of our senses’ response to the spatial built forms that people invest their time in. It tries to cover a specific topic in each chapter that in order to deconstruct the book, it is necessary to cover each chapter individually.
“ Architecture organizes and structures space for us, and its interiors and the objects enclosing and inhabiting its rooms can facilitate or inhibit our activities by the way they use this language”(Lawson pg.6).