The Tectonic Revolution in Architecture - Essay Example

The Tectonic Revolution in Architecture Introduction Like everything else that we base our life upon, architecture and engineering are also constantly evolving, going through phases of drastic changes in the methods, structural styles and materials used in the process of architectural planning. The tectonic revolution in architecture during the nineteenth and twentieth century changed the way that buildings were planned, constructed and looked. There were changes in the materials used, planning methods, construction techniques and functional ideas of architecture. Like all changes, the architectural revolution received different views from different people. This paper discusses the views and evaluates how the new ideas were received by different architects of the period, including Adolf Loos, Le Corbusier, Frederic Keisler and Gottfried Semper. Le Corbusier was quite critical about the advent of new materials in the field of architecture, being very supportive of changes. He talks of how it is necessary to accept changes in architecture and how architecture has died with the tendency to rot with the old practices, ideas and design. He advocates the idea, arguing that all changes are inevitably for the better. He compares them to the use of tools, stating that older tools require more energy and time and that when we come up with new tools, we undoubtedly throw the old ones. He talks of how it is foolishness to hold on to something that is old, takes up more energy, time and how it will be an idea that will rot with the emergence of new ones. Corbusier talks of how the exterior world has changed with the lapse of time and with the introduction of technology and machines. He said of the changes that were being brought into architecture, “We have a new vision and a new social life, but we have not adopted the house accordingly.” Corbusier talks of how the lack in the evolution in architecture was causing people to feel the gloom of living in a house that has no magnificence or beauty that appeals to the heart anymore and that the roof that has been so dear, has crumbled, succumbed to the lack of beauty that reaches the heart. Frederic Keisler began with the tearing down of buildings that were influenced by the basic architectural styles that existed before the tectonic revolution. He was also very enthusiastic about the changes that the field of architecture was facing, understanding that the new forms, methods, structures and designs were more functional and elastic to life. He talks of how he tore down a building, replacing the architectural structure itself. The demand was functional architecture, not those that were based on the traditional forms of architecture. The space city, the spherical space, the axis, the foundation, the walls were all part of the structure that were to be removed and modified. The architects were quite enthusiastic about the changes that were to be brought into the field. The building was meant to create more possibilities of living, putting together a city that would emerge from new architecture. The idea and theory on the whole received positive comments and reactions from architectures on the whole. The ideas were mainly based on functionality and no longer were based on ornamentation and design that revolved around the looks of the building. Le Corbusier, especially was very keen on promoting the idea of functional buildings. He talks of how it is necessary to be able to differentiate between necessary support and unnecessary support. The unnecessary elements are removed from the building, only including the elements that are necessary, that are functional and that serve a purpose. During the period of the tectonic architectural revolution, Corbusier and Loos authored books that supported the emergence of new architecture. They argued the need for functionality, the need for accommodation, the need for expansion of the city and the lack of necessity for ornamentation. While Corbusier believed that the beauty of architecture and buildings lies in the construction and functionality itself, Loos believed that it was a crime to waste energy, investment and time in ornamentation. Corbusier stated that there were five points that defined the new architecture that would replace the unnecessary clatter that was inevitably part of the traditional form of architecture. Corbusier believed that the five points, the supports, the roof gardens, free designing of ground plan, the horizontal windows and free design of the façade would transform the architectural structure completely. Corbusier was very quick in incorporating these ideas into his plans. He made plans that were economical and functional rather that ornamental. He believed in utilization of space and accommodation of as many as the space had the potential to actually hold. The designs incorporated floors that were extended beyond supporting walls, giving independence to design of the façade. The new designs gave complete freedom to individual aspects of the architecture such as interiors, exterior façade and different floors. The ideas made the buildings a lot more functional and economical. Loos was also very keen on this very idea and indulged in construction that was functional. Loos made very strong points in his book describing the principle of cladding, he talks of how the cladding material must not be confused with the material that is clad. This is an idea or theory that came to become popular with the new architecture. It was his theory that all things must be accepted in the form that is truly real, more architecture and less dominant of the art that had been playing an important part in the field of architecture up until the revolution. While Corbusier was very particular about the design and functionality of the buildings in new architecture, Loos talked of how the faced would be determined by the evolving or changing patterns of cladding. He talks of how true colors made stronger impressions that did others, bringing to the principle of cladding which stated that any material may be clad in any other material that does not resemble itself. Meaning, wood could be colored anything but the color of wood. This perhaps defines the changes that came in the façade design of new architecture. Other architects talked of how technology was an advancement and how architecture, like all other forms of technology or fields must continue to evolve and not retain the ancient forms and practices that would prevent any changes. It is said that when technology reaches it complete fulfillment it becomes architecture. It was in the revolution period that architecture became more than art and gave importance to calculations, designs and planning. The theory was implemented in all forms by the introduction of newer methods of fabrication and prefabrication. Architects came to believe that architecture had more relation to technology than it did to art, functionality and purpose became the most important part of architecture. all great architects of the period believed that architecture marks time and the magnificence of the architecture lies in replacing that which is old and no more in the capacity to bring joy with that which is closer to functionality and technology. architects stated that the elements of architecture are defined by style of the architecture that is defined by and influenced by the people or the culture that it originates from, meaning the Egyptians, Assyrians and others have had their own styles of architecture, which is also constantly evolving. In the book, four elements of architecture, we learn that art has always been a part of architecture, beginning from primitive ages where walls were covered by mats, the first forms of art. The discussion is about the importance that art has had in architecture and how it will always be a part of architecture, meaning that ornamentation would be a part of architecture that cannot quite be replaced. Architects like Semper believed that it art was necessarily a part of architecture and that no matter how architectural designs evolved; they would necessarily incorporate art in them. Some of the architects believed that functionality would require to be complemented by ornament or art, for it was one of the basic elements of architecture. Architects such as Viollet-le-Duc believed that architecture needed to be refined, modified and transformed from ancient and traditional forms. He talks of how it is important that when a new architectural theory, idea or style is introduced, it must have in it a form of greatness that is equivalent to the architecture of the past. These architects were consistent in their belief that architecture, in the process of evolution, would undergo changes in all forms of its structure and design, contributing to the overall architectural style of the period, bringing about changes, with minimum or no architectural influences from the past. Duc stated in regard to the new architectural revolution, “The buildings should be splendid is all very well; but at least let them be sensible and not designed chiefly for mere external show.” This is perhaps the idea that governed the entire tectonic revolution in architecture, being supported by most architects of the period, although initially criticized by those who have been accustomed to the ancient and traditional forms of architecture. it became necessary to define architecture by purpose, utility and function rather than by beauty, ornament and art. Architectural styles that followed were dominated by functional designs which were also intended to be economical with the use of materials such as steel and concrete. Further, the changes in structure and techniques such as prefabrication were introduced, changing traditional architecture forever. Most architects were in favor of the tectonic revolution in architecture, supporting the introduction of new methods, believing that they were more efficient and well planned. Architects were supportive of the introduction of new materials into the field of architecture. the designs that were based on the ancient architectural styles were no longer followed, and new methods were being adopted. This paper discussed the methods that were adopted, showing that the revolution was supported widely. References Corbusier, L. (2008). Toward an architecture. Frances Lincoln Ltd. Loos, A. (1982). Spoken into the Void. The MIT Press. Roth, L.M. America Builds. Harper and Row publishers. Semper, G. The four elements of architecture and other writings. Cambridge University Press. Duc, V.L. (1990). The architectural theories of Viollet-le-Duc. Read More