History of Architecture Manifesto

If there’s a simple way to summarize History of Architecture class, it would be that architecture will never achieve the perfect state where every agrees there’s nothing else we could do to change. However, that is also the beauty of architecture itself. From the time of ancient Roman architecture to a Post-Modern world, there are so much going on in the architectural world that helps make the distinction between each period of time. The period of time we’re living in now will soon be the history of tomorrow and hence, making another mark on the history itself as having another unique types of architecture. So what makes our period stands out from the others in terms of architecture?

The 21st Century architecture is distinctive in the fact that it recognizes its history and uses the context it lives in. Architecture borrows so much from the history and yet it is made distinctive from the predecessors with the collaboration of today’s advanced technology. What does today mean? Today is not this moment. It always starts just before now and ends some time after now. How you define those limits both form and inform your point of reference. Our era starts when the internet came and now we are living in an information era where information moves on a much faster pace and knowledge had become so easily accessible. Technology has been so progressively advanced that impossible limitations of the past are now achieved and everything else is now possible.

Now, If everything is possible then what is the use of learning from history. One may not progress forward if that person is unable to learn from the past. People in our generation may strive for a certain perfect type of design and they may even achieve it in their lifetime. However, even if they do, this form does not become the one perfect standard, never changing again. Instead, the next generation considers what has been created before and strives to achieve something else. So you see why history is important? We’ve seen certain types of architecture over the course of history that was constructed, demolished, renovated, then reconstructed over and over again because history can always be further perfected. As I have said in the beginning, no design will ever achieve a perfect state. The cycle will never stop as time keeps moving. The next generations would be living in an ever-changing context for them to work. So, you see, technology is just an additional benefit to our design but history is what’s really important.

All great architects learn from their history such as Le Courbusier, who learned from Vitruvius and adapt them to his own design. The importance of history make the History of Architecture class very crucial. This manifesto will not only cover informations about architects and the buildings of each era but films and how people of that era view its architecture as well.

Bernini and Baromini Of The Baroque Era

Talking about Bernini and Baromini of the Baroque era, friend and foe of the time, is like talking oxymoron but more on that later. The Baroque era is similar to high renaissance but with much heavier decorations and much more expressive. The architects of this time was influenced by Michelangelo who introduced the Mannerist style into architecture, comparable to the post modernism of today’s era. The most important architects of the Baroque era is, without a doubt, Bernini and Baromini.

First, about Bernini, we could really see resemblances of his works to the work of Micheangelo, especially in the use of sculpture within architecture itself. However, Bernini’s work can easily be distinguished as it captures the essence of life into the sculpture, making it more realistic. This can be easily comprehensible by looking at “The Rape of Proserpina”. You can see “real” human characteristics in the sculpture, be it the dented skin on the woman’s body when wrapped by a man’s hand and the expressive face and tears. You can also that the human proportion of Bernini is much more refined and realistic, for example, his own version of the sculpture of david.

Sculpture of David by Bernini

Baromini, Bernini’s friend and rival, however, is even much more expressive than Bernini but through the use of architecture and not a human sculpture. He used shape and form in architecture to create a space that is very expressive. This is evidently seen through his work, “San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane” where he used geometric shapes such as triangles, oval and circle that are considered dramatic and evocative.

San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane by Baromini

Even if they were rivals, there were no definite judging of who was better. Bernini and Baromini, being one of the best Baroque architects have a great, unique quality concerning their works.

Applying History: Brunelleschi and Courbusier

This week’s lecture take us back through time and see the architects of the renaissance era. So what have I learn from the class? To simply answer that question, the class focuses on how the architecture masters we’ve studied throughout the course have all use history as a tool and inspiration. There is also no doubt that one of the most significant building of all-time from the Renaissance era is the Brunelleschi Dome by Filippo Brunelleschi. Brunelleschi borrowed history as a tool to build his renowned work from the ancient Roman. After his visit to Rome, he brought back the impression he had on the ancient ruins and the Roman architectures which is simply what Vitruvius has said, Principle of commodity, firmness, and delight. The first concept that Filippo Brunelleschi meant to do was to add a flying buttress but there is a rule that architects may not build buttresses in Italy so he created this remarkable Brunelleschi Dome.

Brunelleschi Dome

Another architect who we must talk about that uses history is Le Courbusier. Le Courbusier studied about Vitruvius’ man and simply make his own human proportion to make an architecture that lies within the concept of symmetry, proportion and rhythm.

So this lesson has taught me to be aware of history and make a great use of it. This is why we must pay great attention to our history class!

Junkspace

So what is a “junkspace”? It is simply an architecture that ignores all the surroundings and its context and stand tall on their own, creating a totally new context within itself. Yes, a new era for architecture has begun. With all the computer technology today, we are now able to explore a totally new concept of architecture that comes up every once in a while. Architectural design has been stretched beyond its earlier limitations and a new forms and functions are continuously introduced.

Expressionism -- Is it right or wrong?

This week’s lecture takes us fast through the postmodernism era and explore expressionists’ architectures. So the question is that is expressionism wrong? Do they destroyed everything that is architectural and turns the subject into something that is too literal? Yes, they took the concept of “form follows function” word-by-word and make a building that takes forms of their own desire. For example, a duck building that inside is selling, obviously, duck.

However, there are also great architects that makes interesting shapes and revolutionize the architectural world by being expressive. Due to the development of technology in architecture, buildings are not confined to only be a box and rectangles anymore. Architects like Frank Gehry or Zaha Hadid designs their building to have curvature and complexity.

In conclusion, there is no right or wrong in architecture (if it doesn’t collapse). One may find it to be a shallow end towards architecture and some may find it spectacular and prefer the building in unique forms.

Black, White (or...) Gray?

This week’s lecture take us to a discussion on “Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture” by Robert Venturi. When we look at the very specific concept of Modernism where it’s either “right” or “wrong”, “Bourgeois” or “Non-Bourgeois”, “Black” or “White”, if you could not choose where you stand, there’s always “Post-Modernism”

From the book, we discussed and tries to tell the difference between being “complex” and “complicated”. They are not the same, in fact they are almost the opposite of each other. Complexity can also mean simple and pure while complicated is just, well..., complicated. Post-Modernism plays between the area of being white and black, and does not limiting themselves to any set of rules. I like the fact that post-modernist architects are free and didn’t force their designs but rather making it flexible and adaptable.

Playtime by Jacques Tati

Playtime by Jacques Tati

This week, we take a brief peek at the film “Playtime” by Jacque Tati. There is a reason this film was shown in our history class. Although we did not get the chance to see the whole film, it is already clear what Jacques was trying to express through the movie. “Playtime” clearly shows the viewpoint of the director towards the modernism era. The film starts out in the airport and right from the very first scene we see how the architecture and interior looks like at the time, big glass facade building with geometric arranging inside. To their eyes, the architecture may seem futuristic but it would soon become just a normal building in the present day. Yes, the buildings shown in the film, they are seen all over in Bangkok.

The films follows a tour group of American ladies arriving in Paris. They are clearly fascinated by the modernism era but what is funny to me is that the buildings all look very similar, if not the same. There are also posters showing different countries with exactly the same type of architecture on it. Furthermore, there are also a chair that turns to its original shape once the user gets up, how the main character gets lost through all the cubicle office, it is clear up to this point that Jacques Tati is trying to mock the modernism era.

I find the film really amusing and very enjoyable to watch.

Visual Acoustics: Julius Shulman

Julius Shulman was one of my favorite architectural photographer, being was one of the best and still is in my heart. He expresses architecture in the period of modernism through photographs with a glimpse on the people living in the house. Not only the architectures he shot are iconic but it is also undeniable that the photographs of Julius Schulman is as iconic as well. The uniqueness of Julius’ photos must be how he captures the most beautiful design element from the architecture and expresses it together with the lifestyle of the habitant.

Shulman’s work is not considered a “product of architecture” but the work itself demands that it is an independent form of art. As said above, every images taken by Shulman really has its uniqueness of his perception to the architecture and his understanding of the relation between the building and its context. His pictures are so beautifully composited that it makes many of his work an iconic architectural photos of the modernism era. As he believes that the precise compositions reveal not just the architectural idea behind a building’s surface, but also the vision and hopes of an entire age. A sense of humanity is always present in his work, even when the human figure is absent from the actual photographs. In contrast, Placing people in the architecture shows architecture being functional. When people appears in the picture, the audience would draw themselves to be one of those and by this, the audience of the photograph see another dimension of architecture where they get involve as a part of the architecture by seeing sample of how it can be use, live and work in the architecture.

Julius Schulman has taught me so much about the little details in architecture and he will always live in my heart.

A Glimpse On Modernism

This week’s lecture take us to Mies Van de Rohe, a world-renowned modernism architect and still refers to our previous study on “From Bauhaus to Our House”. He was one of the very important avant-garde of the modernism movement and one of my favorite architect due to the fact that his designs are all based on “Less is More” concept.

There is no doubt the “Barcelona chair” Mies Van de Rohe designed is a masterpiece. It is not often that you come across furniture that stays popular through decades of new trends that comes and goes. However, I still find this piece of furniture quite ironic since from the reading “From Bauhaus to Our House”, Mies was one of the architects who believed in designing for the non-bourgeois. How could this expensive chair, ranging at 6 digits number of price be any non-bourgeois, it is clearly for the bourgeois who can afford this much. They are also difficult to mass produce which also contradicts the fact that this chair is from a non-bourgeois designer. However, despite the fact that this notorious (to myself) chair is not a non-bourgeois design, it could not be argue that it is a masterpiece. Owning this chair simply means you’re investing on a piece of history, an icon of modernism.

Today’s History of Architecture’s class takes us to a movie that has brief connections with the lesson we learned previously, “From Bauhaus to our House” and the film is called “Metropolis” by Fritz Lang. It is a silent film done right, so a lot of the the meaning must be interpreted visually. The film explores the relationship and an oxymoron against human and machines. Since this is a history of architecture class, the analysis of this film will be approached through an architectural perspective. Throughout my analysis I will try to look to different scenes and attempt to analyze the space in the film through my understanding of the architectural history.

The film strongly interpret urbanity. Metropolis starts off with images of structures operating mechanically and suddenly my mind goes to “the industrial age”. There are clear juxtaposition going on in the film between the workers and thinkers or in metaphoric term, humans and machines. Without the heart and understanding, the thinkers and workers would not unite as a whole unit. The film contrasts the two group by showing the workers are working deep under the ground while the thinkers all live in skyscrapers. The workers all dressed the same, work through an endless hours, removed all the identity of humans, they are almost... like a robot.

In conclusion to the movie, Rotwang decided to expresses robots to be human-like and how the human workers are controlled like machines. The movie shows the ugly truth of the human traits and how we sometimes get lost through all the technological fuzz around us.

From Bauhaus to Our House

From Bauhaus to Our House

Based on the readings from “From Bauhaus to Our House” by Tom Wolfe, I’ve got a clearer insight on the subject of Modern Architecture and its context. Furthermore, the text were amusingly enjoyable and very easy to read with Wolfe’s occasional humor inserted throughout the article.

From the reading, Tom Wolfe’s criticizes the movement of Modern Architecture that migrated from Europe. After World War I was over, Europeans wanted to have a new take on things, hence, “starting from zero” and recreating the world after a terrible war. Walter Gropius founded the Bauhaus (House of Construction) School where young architects and artists learn to “start from zero”. The Bauhaus was created having two objectives in mind:

1. To create for the workers.
2. To reject all things “bourgeois”.

To further clarify about “bourgeois”, it simply means ‘of or characteristic of the middle class, typically with reference to its perceived materialistic values or conventional attitudes.’ Because of ‘Bourgeois’, the act of rebellious attitudes towards a traditional, say, having a high pitched roof. However, there has never been a clear definition weather what is considered ‘Bourgeois’ or ‘not Bourgeois’ that it become so vague and nasty to the architects of that age being criticized of having a bourgeois design.

The stream of this movement includes a use of new materials to architecture, blending in concrete, steel, wood, glass, and stucco. and staying on a rather neutral tone such as white, beige, gray, and black.

One of the earliest works of the self-taught architect Tadao Ando is the Azuma House in Sumiyoshi, where the house is split into a spaces devoted to daily life (composed of an austere geometry) by the insertion of an abstract space for the games of wind and light. His goal, he says, was to introduce a question on the inertia that has invaded human dwellings.

Although there’s not a definite guideline to being a non-bourgeois architect, Tadao Ando, the architect I’m working on is clearly one of the avant-garde of the movements. His design of the renowned Azuma House is distinctly bourgeois with the blending of concreate, wood and glass with a raw-gray color of a concrete. It stands out among its conventional context of the rowhouses in that time and at the same time, blends in to the environment.

Tadao Ando’s design follows every principles of Le Courbusier who Ando practically learned everything from by reading a book about him.