Mass Production Focusing on Either Canonical Works of Modern Architects or the Works of Non-Architects - Research Paper Example

?Discuss how mass production transformed architecture by focusing on either canonical works of modern architects or the works of non-architects Introduction In the past few decades, major changes and technology and industrialization have been introduced. These changes have caused major shifts in how the usual work processes have been laid out, from the simplest household activities, to the most modern technological ventures. These changes also imply the faster and easier ways of carrying out activities, including the building of homes and the manufacturing of various products. The introduction of mass production in the building and design of homes has also brought about major changes in architecture. This article shall discuss how mass production transformed architecture, mostly focusing on either canonical works of modern architects or the works of non-architects. Body The introduction of computers have transformed design processes as well as design economics as it has also changed the quality of products which can be secured. The design software which designers have come to use has shifted from being a discerning environment and concept to a more generic mass produced design. The quality, the artistic-focused design as well as the modified quality of buildings, mostly homes, based on architects have generally been indicated for the rich and privileged members of society (Mumford, 2003). However, the traditional concept of prefabricated buildings also includes in the discussion a different type of craft not often seen among the low and middle class. Prefabs seem to be the answer to the issues on governmental housing systems, emergency shelters, as well as the need to secure environmentally friendly homes (Friedman, et.al., 2013). Just as museums have guaranteed for art, the prefabrication exports effective work for the general public. This is known as the commoditization of architecture and this paper shall further discuss the need for a strong interest in prefabs and related commoditization. Prefabs are generally an encompassing term. It is easily understood within the concepts of non-architects with great interest in architecture (Harker, n.d). It is often viewed with confusion by those who are not aware of design concepts. Prefabs also do not present with a specific definition, one which would allow for a strong appreciation and showing in the market. In general, all the houses are created in the US with prefabricated elements, but mostly, they do not have the necessary elements which would indicate that they are genuinely prefab (Harker, n.d). Modular housing is generally associated with prefabricated housing, but should also not be confused with manufactured housing, within the concepts relating to construction quality as well as associated processes. Although the manufactured homes bring up different ideas on mobile housing, which are not nearly acceptable, modular housing presents more attractive site-assembled parts. Moreover, the Building Research Establishment in Scotland indicates that prefabs, whether they be of full volumetric indication or founded on component application, the need only covers construction applications, not the end-result or product (Phillipson, 2001). In general, there are different elements of prefabs: the kit home, the panels, and the volumetric modules (Blauvelt, 2007). The kit home refers to the parts which would be delivered on site, already packed with different parts to be assembled. The panels call for additional on-site work. One of the panels is delivered in large panels, including the walls, the roof, and floor; the rest are put together by skilled labourers (Buchanan, 2007). The module home covers a complete and defined prefab home. The different parts of the home are built in the factory with all the necessary parts built together, unless the different parts are used due to issues in the transport (Blauvelt, 2007). Moreover, the volumetric module is at 90% completion after shipment. As such, securing results from delivery to the handling of keys covers a short period (Blauvelt, 2007). In most instances, the lands must be bought, the necessary permits secured, and site built to accommodate the structure. As the structure is set in place, the home is already defined as an estate (Connors, 2007). Although prefabs seem to be a new trend in American architecture, it has already long been a practice in Europe. Scandinavia has also adopted prefabs as its style, with new Swedish units being factory built (Slater, 2007). Some critics seem to regret the building of these units. The regret seems to lie due to the fact that houses are no longer built by hand workers; however, it must also be noted that most technologies these days are not anymore built by hand workers (Hilgeman, 2004). Although the history of prefabs is not a strong argument in seeking due relevance within the current construction market, to understand the past of prefabs, including their future, its essential elements may easily be understood (Harker, n.d). Due to its difficult and confusing legacy, it is noted that there seems to be something confusing with the process and through the years, individuals who seek success and eventual implementation are becoming worthwhile. Blauvelt (2007) expressed that prefabs have been looked upon with much disapproval as modern architecture’s oldest, but newest concept. As various sources indicate the development of prefabs for different countries, the architects and large companies do not consider it a new concept. Palladio saw much relief in the prefabs while also accepting different commissions. With the application of prefabs, including ideas which can be used repeatedly, Palladio was able to change the industry (Dwell, 2006). Buchanan indicates that the first American prefab came from England in the 1600s; however, the colonial settlers had so much lumber that the shipping from England did not actually last for far too long (Buchanan, 2007). The Crystal Palace in London, built in 1851 from glass and wrought iron has been built using the panelized system. Paxton designed this, building it for the Great Exhibition to showcase different elements of the Industrial Revolution. Blauvelt does not fully support Hodgson being a pioneer of the modular structures, using chicken coops, dog houses, and summer cottage in the late 1800s. Although, this did not sell much, these products became the staging ground for Hodgson’s work which actually housed individuals (Blauvelt, 2007). Dwell Magazine (2006), a supporter of prefabs indicates the use of the wood-framed units by Brodie from Liverpool, England, as the major and popular prefab sample. Such combination of possibilities indicates diverse opinions as well as stronger clarity in prefabs. As the industrial revolution set in with its new ideas and techniques, the use of glass and metal became more popular in the prefab designs. By the end of the Second World War, these prefabs became very much popular (Blauvelt, 2007). Soldiers returning from war were hoping to build homes and in different parts of the world destroyed by the war, homes were being rebuilt. The importance of industrializing residential homes was very much apparent. Moreover, at this point, the quicker they were built, the better. Some developments were seen in the housing industry which proved crucial in the development of mass-produced homes. Henry Ford and his mass production processes are often mentioned with the development and expansion of prefabs. The automobile industry and issues in the transport of military equipment soon convinced President Eisenhower to secure the Interstate Highways System (Harker, n.d). This is also allowed for big shipments, allowing factory-built homes to eventually be built (Blauvelt, 2007). Since they were introduced, prefabs have had opponents. Jay Baldwin mentions that most prefab models are considered CATNAP or Cheapest Available Technology Narrowly Avoiding Prosecution and are likely to meet unfortunate ends (Burkhart and Arieff, 2002). Although architects and theorists praise the prospects and possibilities relating to prefabs, the whole idea of prefabs contradict the theories relating to living architecture which many renowned and reputable architects like Christopher Alexander has sought to build. He declares that the specific elements of a building cannot be brought to life when they are created from modular parts, as these parts often dominate the geometry of the room (Alexander, 1979). Still, the present practice within the industry is supporting the practical houses including all the luxuries while also serving the needs of the environment. Architects like Le Corbusier, Frank Lloyd Wright, Christopher Alexander, Walter Gropius and other influential architects from the 20th century expressed their opinions about mass housing and the availability of architecture to the mass of people. Through mass-produced and well-designed products which can also be used many times, it is possible to serve the masses, ensuring access to fine designs (Harker, n.d). Le Corbusier considered the benefits of mass-produced houses. He discussed that the industry based on a larger scale must also be concerned with building and supporting the elements of the house based on mass production. The mass production spirit must according to him be supported. Such ideas are very much related with his House Machine Theory which is very much related to the creation of prefabs (Corbusier, 1986). Gropius supported the importance of mass production at the Bauhaus which he established in 1919. His designs were simple, and included industrial elements, and they also did not include much ornamentation. His buildings included elements of the modern prefabs (Hilgeman, 2004). Frank Lloyd Wright matched the prefabs with his own kit houses. His Usonian included prefab walls, a slab roof, and concrete slabs which had radiant heat (Curtis, 1996). He believed also in simplicity, reducing elements to their simplest elements and considering basic elements (Chang, 2006). Still, the main goal of the Usonian design was to ensure well-designed homes available to the mass of ordinary citizens. The mass produced buildings need design integrity; they must be based on specific principles in order to legally commoditize the architectural elements which generally feature and support good designs. John Ruskin included various elements which would generally support a morally good structure (Harker, n.d). He declares that a house must be permanent, must be found in one place, must be designed by architects, and must be unique. Where all these elements are present, the house would be considered of proper architecture (Davies, 2005). Architect-designed and prefab elements can be used together in order to manage things better and still secure effective results and unique elements. In the end, good products which are easily marketable would still be produced and available in the market. Benefits of prefabs are numerous, helping improve lives, communities, and the environment. It reduces construction time, allowing earlier returns in investment, it also reduces on-site construction and congestion (Harker, n.d). Quality control is easier within the factory setting, not the construction setting. Prefabs can also be carried out where the skilled labourers are easily available. There is less time lost to bad weather conditions and dangerous construction settings and moulds can be used several times in the prefabs (Harker, n.d). Concerns on energy consumption are also addressed. Prefabs can feature green designs which can create their own energy, mostly with the use of solar panels for some prefab homes (Kauffman, 2006). For some homes, the lack of skilled contractors also emerged as an issue for the building of homes. With factory-based construction seen in prefabs, these skilled contractors are now superfluous. A simple feature of prefabs indicates a specific link to environmentally supported designs. Some houses are seen on pilings in order to secure the non-existent structures on the land it covers. Others use elements which refashion grey water, by-products from dishwashers, and other waste waters (Harker, n.d). The water is then used to water landscapes and sometimes reused in houses to flush toilets and support heating. The BRE survey indicates that the impact of a building on the environment is strongly founded on the design and landscapes which are mostly independent of whether the building is actually taken from traditional or prefab routes. It presents huge benefits in relation to the environment, in reducing pollution and construction debris (Phillipson, 2007). With present media reports and focus on the impact of natural disasters, the public awareness of environmental issues is very much widespread. Homes damaged following Katrina left millions of people seeking shelter. Moreover, the people were also not likely to recover financially from the destruction of their homes (Harker, n.d). There was a strong desire for the damaged areas to rebuild, however, factories and workers blocked the major rebuilding efforts. This was the time for the prefabs to take the spotlight. Organizations such as Housing Every Last Person (HELP) and Global Village Shelter (GVS) soon took part in the establishment of homes to match the needs of the people in the aftermath of the disaster (Global Village Shelters, 2007). The GVS was very much concerned with their financial capability of accomplishing their goals and HELP was able to secure small houses which were aesthetically pleasing (Harker, n.d). The HELP houses were built as permanent homes (National Public Radio, 2005). Brad Pitt’s Pink Project is also part of the mass production efforts following the Katrina. Collaborating with Graft Lab Architects, Cherokee Investment Partners, there were 14 blocks which would house 150 homes of smaller areas secured by unskilled craftsmen (Make it Right, 2007). The materials were not expensive, were lightweight, but still very durable. In instances of homes with consumers being the end target, even with emergency necessities, the elements in securing prefabs is a major element to its success. Most of the time, prefabs would have been based on designs with client ideas in mind, still providing discretion for the designer to ensure marketability of the design. Still, some architects have observed strong elements in the customization of floor plans. After discussing with architects, plans are sent to factories. At this point, permits are filed and sites purchased (Make it Right, 2007). The PATH Concept Home includes a home which is seeking to test the extent to which efficiency in the building process can be secured. The PATH supporters believe that their factory was able to secure a prefab home in 20 days. Construction is based on the standardization of elements with the power to secure them on site. Bowles indicates that the function of products in factories would likely be better as the conditions are often the same, it is more practical to ensure quality control (Scott, 2005). In general, the function which is most important which would allow prefabs to succeed is the increased interest and specific evaluation of the design. As more builders and designers consider more specific focus into its history, including its benefits, while still assessing previous gaps in the prefabrication process, there would be a growth of the prefab market. Whether or not concerns like global warming and emissions would be used by politicians time and again, through the strong advancements in building processes, these people would also experience good architecture (Harker, n.d). Crayton (2001) discussed the elements involved in mass production and mass customization. At the start of the 21st century, the industrialized countries were mostly focused on mass production, mass marketing, and mass distribution. However, a consideration of developments in information and technology is implying bigger possibilities towards mass customization in order to respond faster to the needs of consumers within affordable rates. Mass customization implies different elements for different agencies. There are varying methods and tools to secure it (Crayton, 2001). Some products can be manager within retail outlets and other products may also adjust easier to fit the needs of the user, for instance, the use of intelligent systems which adapt to the needs and which adjust to the styles of consumers. It is also possible for consumers to discuss with the designers and to participate in the manufacturing processes, and change designs of the product. For most products, it would be difficult to provide a specific and free infinite option (Crayton, 2001). The extensive range of elements relating to mass customization is based on the confusion for the designers. For some product designers, mass customization implies the return to the period of designer-maker and for some others, the only manifestation for actual mass customization is the design-to-order. These perceptions do not cover the specific crucial points of design and customization: the key to ensuring cost efficacy is to modularize and configure (Crayton, 2001). One of the main strategies in securing such elements would be the use of modular systems which can cover most of the consumer needs. The other element would be to configure systems which indicate choices for consumers and indicates which part would go where. It is also important to conceptualize the positive elements of ordinary prefab housing in order to come up with favourable architectural reactions. The positive elements of the ordinary prefab housing is based on the fact that it develops into a collaborative process with factory managers, with engineers, buyers, marketers, floor workers, and even the lorry drivers (Davies, 2005). Architects would have to base their designs on the input of these experts in order to secure technology with specific knowledge on the materials involved in production. Ordinary elements usually focus on managing old technology and ensuring these to be safer and cheaper. More significant would be the discussions with the end consumers. Ordinary prefabs have been successful as they are generally appealing to the consumers and are not couched in terms which architects may not be able to understand (Davies, 2005). Architects have to use the language which most people understand and use it appropriately. Moreover, in relation to normal architecture, most people can conceptualize and build these typologies and are indicated in manuals. Architects have to stop ignoring these manuals and learn to apply these to their highest advantage. From these elements, architects need to learn. The usual typology is still not free from problems and some of its advantages can also be considered disadvantages (Davies, 2005). Resistance from architects in the past to the ordinary prefabs is the viewpoint that to prefab buildings, there is a need to standardize them and mass product them, thereby securing a built setting which is very much monotonous. The disadvantage is also founded on the impersonal mass customers and the lack of sensitivity and adaptability to the place and the qualities of the building sites (Davies, 2005). Conclusion Based on the discussion above, it can be deduced that mass production has impacted significantly on architecture, mostly in terms of allowing for it to enter the realm of mass commoditization. To the traditional architects, they perceive the mass commoditization process to be a break-away from the classic designs which used to be only within reach of those who could afford it. However, mass production has allowed for these designs to be mass consumable. Architecture in some ways has become more common, veering away from the exclusive designs. To the general public, this is very much a favourable development. For architects, this has presented a greater challenge in terms of craft and designs. References Alexander, C., 1979. The Timeless Way of Building. Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press. Blauvelt, A., 2007. Prefab Primer. Walker Art Center. Available at: http://design.walkerart.org/prefab/Main/PrefabPrimer [Accessed 03 January 2014]. Buchanan, M., 2007. Cinderella Story. New York House Magazine. Available at: http://www.housemedianetwork.com/archive/article.phpissue=12&dept=2&id=173&pg=1? [Accessed 04 January 2014]. Burkhart, B. & Arieff, A., 2002. Prefab. Layton: Gibbs Smith Publishers. Chang, L., 2006. Wisdom for the Soul. Washington DC: Gnosophia Publishers. Connors, T., 2007. Types of Prefab Houses. How Stuff Works. Available at: http://home.howstuffworks.com/prefab-house3.htm [Accessed 04 January 2014] Corbusier, L., 1986. Towards a New Architecture. New York: Dover Publications. Crayton, T., 2001. The Design Implications of Mass Customization. Available at: http://www.di.net/articles/the-design-implications-of-mass-customization/ [Accessed 04 January 2014]. Curtis, W., 1996. Modern Architecture since 1900. Oxford Oxfordshire: Phaidon. Davies, C., 2005. The Prefabricated Home. London: Reaktion Books. Dwell, 2006. Plotting Prefab. Dwell, p. 154. Friedman, A., Sprecher, A., & Mohamed, B. E., 2013. A computer-based system for mass customization of prefabricated housing. Open House International, 38(1). Global Village Shelters, 2007. 6 Meter GVS. Global Village Shelters. GVS, LLC. Available at: http://www.gvshelters.com/6_meter_gvs.htm [Accessed 03 January 2014]. Harker, E., n.d. The Commoditization of Architecture. Available at: http://www.ericharker.com/work/the-commoditization-of-architecture.pdf [Accessed 04 January 2014]. Hilgeman, J., 2004. A Prefabricated Framing and Enclosure System: Economy, Flexibility, and Applications. Univ. of Washington. Available at: http://code.arc.cmu.edu/archive/upload/JH_thesis.0.pdf [Accessed 03 January 2014]. Kaufmann, M., 2006. The Proof is in the Prefab. Dwell. Make it Right, 2007. The Pink Project. Make It Right. Available at: http://makeitrightnola.org/mir_SUB.php?section=pink&page=main [Accessed 04 January 2014]. Mumford, L., 2003. Mass-Production and the Modern Houses. Available at: http://archrecord.construction.com/inthecause/onTheState/0311mumford.asp [Accessed 04 January 2014]. National Public Radio, 2007. Katrina & Recovery. All Things Considered. Available at: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4973680 [Accessed 03 January 2014]. Phillipson, M., 2001. Defining the Sustainability of Prefabrication and Modular Process in Construction. BRE Scotland. Available at: http://projects.bre.co.uk/prefabrication/ [Accessed 04 January 2014]. Shepherd, S., 2005. The Factory Factor. Professional Builder Magazine, pp. 81-82. Slater, D., 2006. Innovators: the Henry Ford of Green Homes. Sierra, pp. 34-35. Read More