Modernist Architecture Based on the Theme of Progres - Essay Example

?Buckminster Fuller and Oscar Niemeyer: Modernist Architecture Based on the Theme of Progress Introduction The concepts of progress, change and novelty form the core of modernism in architecture. “The aesthetic concepts of modernity and the avant-garde were conceived within a general notion of progress” (Hvattum & Hermansen 2004: 30). This forms the logic of history in which new technical and scientific innovations have facilitated change. Modernism in architecture takes into account three key epistemological positions: history, theology, and politics, with progress as an underlying characteristic of these concepts. Modernists in architecture ignored existing material, eliminating them on the basis that they were outdated and impediments to true creativity and progress. The architecture of Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983) is acclaimed for its distinctive nature and farsightedness. He is renowned as an American visionary, and an intellecutal of our times. The architect is a key innovator of the twentieth century in the fields of designing, architecture, engineering, invention, and philosophy (Gorman 2005). The other contemporary architect in this study is Oscar Niemeyer (born 1907) the Brazilian modernist, whose creativity aimed at reflecting his country’s progress. Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to investigate the theme of “Progress” in the modernist work of the two architects Buckminster Fuller and Oscar Niemeyer. A detailed examination of three buildings created by each architect, and of their concepts of progress in building the future of cities, will be done. BUCKMINSTER FULLER’S DEPICTION OF PROGRESS IN MODERNIST ARCHITECTURE Buckminster Fuller’s architecture based on modernism was distinctive in style. He invented the geodesic dome and the octet truss, as well as a wide range of other “paradigm-shifting machines and structural systems” (Levine, Chaisuparasmikul, Yanarella et al, 2011). He was particularly interested in high-strength-to-weight designs with a minimum of material creating the maximum of utility. His designs, and various principles including his engineering philosophy based on the “trimtab” principle, are progressive and intended to create a sustainable and modern urban landscape. Even today, contemporary high-tech design aesthetics are based on Fuller’s designs and engineering principles. The architect’s philosophical analogy of being a Trim Tab or mover of big ships, for improving the way the world works is a unique one. A trim tab is “a small rudder used to turn the larger rudder of big ships, offering tremendous leverage in terms of steering and changing the direction of the ship” (Gabel & Walker 2006). Thus, the trim tab, according to Buckminster Fuller is a powerful metaphor for effective individual leadership, denoting that small and appropriate interventions are capable of leading to large-scale and profound progress. Fuller followed the principle of the trim tab in his own work, producing crucial innovations to aid further architectural developments. Fuller’s Philosophical Vision Related to Mobile Homes Among Buckminster Fuller’s innovative architectural projects are his mass produced homes, and transportable mobile houses as well as geodesic domes. For example, his geodesic domes have actually been airlifted by military helicopters. His buildings were characterized by their light weight and self sufficiency which facilitated travel, and could thereby cause tranformation in human behavior. The mobility and change of places would help people rid themselves of self-created boundaries between various regions, and other differentiations and discriminations, as well as help them achieve a more secular future of global unity (Gorman 2005). Buckminster Fuller’s prime goal was to design and construct an autonomous and practical individual home that could be transported by helicopter wherever the owner wished to move. This pertained to Fuller’s decision to “make the world work for one hundred percent of humanity, in the shortest possible time, through spontaneous cooperation, without ecological offence or the disadvantage of anyone” (BFI 2006: 6). The architect’s strong philosophical approach is evident in his conceptualization of a new model home which was to denote a way of living, and not merely a type of construction. According to Ritchie (2006), Fuller aimed to transform the dwelling unit through the exploitation of industrialization and geometry, based on his unique perspectives about nature. Further, he also believed that human behavior could be changed by this process of transformation of the house. Buckminster Fuller was inspired by Henry Ford’s approach to standardized volume production or mass production, as well as the post-war housing crisis. Consequently, he envisioned the industrially produced autonomous home which could be air-lifted to the idyllic island of one’s personal choice, using the geodesic dome. This innovative idea was a development of his earlier “hopes for both versions of his Dymaxion House and his Standard of Living Package, neither of which were commercially unsuccessful” (Ritchie 2006: 78). However, people living in a dome permanently did not appeal to most people who found it profoundly disturbing, while generating a lot of waste in terms of space, energy, covering material off-cuts, etc. The design hype in this model of housing was not in alignment with the current architectural as well as political orientation towards inexpensive prefabricated housing supplies. Fig.1 The Dymaxion Dwelling Machine or Wichita House by Buckminster Fuller (Buckminster Fuller Institute 2010) Fig.2 Futuristic Design: The Dymaxion Dwelling Machine by Fuller (Associated Content 2011) Fig.3 Dymaxion Dwelling Machine, Wichita, Kansas (MOMA 2010) When Buckminster Fuller conceived of the Dymaxion Dwelling Machine (Figs.1, 2, & 3) in the late 1920s and developed it in 1945, he used aluminium the newest alloy of that time because it was strong, light and easy to dismantle and move. The area of a Dymaxion House was designed to be about 1,100 square feet, and it had two bedrooms. The word Dymaxion was a combination of DY as in dynamic, MAX as in maximum, and ION as in tension. The house was provided with a tension suspension from the central column or mast, and could be transported world-wide in its own metal tube. By the end of World War II, Fuller tried to start a new industry to mass-produce Dymaxion Houses (Buckminster Fuller Institute 2011). The Dymaxion or Wichita House weighed only 3000 pounds as compared to the average house which weighs around 150 tons. The Dymaxion was heated and cooled by natural methods. Further, it made its own power, was damage-proof against earthquakes, tornadoes and storms, and required no maintenance work such as repainting or reroofing, being constructed with permanent, engineered materials. The floor plan could be changed as required, such as narrowing the bedrooms to enlarge the living room. Revolving shelves and rotating closets made things easily accessible without bending or stretching (Buckminster Fuller Institute 2010). Besides being potentially low cost and affordable, the design of the Dymaxion Dwelling Machine was revolutionary. The round shape of the Dymaxion minimized heat loss, as well as cut down on the amount of materials needed for its construction. The dismantled house could be transported inside the metal tube. The unique structure of the house had the distinctive feature of “a tension suspension from a central pole that also served as the house’s electric and plumbing core” (Associated Content 2011). The downdraft ventilation system sucked dust out of rooms and through filters like a multi-headed vacuum cleaner. Significantly, Fuller’s Dymaxion House has been considered to be a failure. The form of the house was very unique, and it incorporated a range of gadgets in many intriguing ways, which are also considered eccentric. It is due to the eccentricity of Fuller’s style that the Dymaxion House was never developed and mass produced (MOMA 2010). Similarly, Ritchie (2006) critically views Buckminster Fuller’s concepts and work are impractical, considers Fuller to be brilliant in expressing himself as “I am the pilot of Spaceship Earth” (p.78), and in captivating and exploiting design students and others. The author states that the actual facts about the deployable universal lightweight home is not so much about sharing the planet, but has more to do with economics as well as a last attempt to fulfill an Utopian idea of the home. Thus, Fuller’s promoting his synergetic perspective of global unity through technological development is challenged by the author, who finds the architect to be cocky and self-assured about his various capabilities as a designer, architect, engineer, poet, philosopher and anticipator. Buckminster Fuller as a World-Scale Architect Fuller was considered as the Utopian engineer who envisioned an island-wide dome that would help to alter the weather, to make umbrellas unnecessary for Manhattanites to carry to work. The magnitude of the project he proposed did not seem impossible to him since “he was never one to allow mere issues of scale to obscure a vision the possible” (Pratt 2008: 295). To Buckminster Fuller, the process of design was associated with dealings of sytemic complexity. He was involved with the dynamic processes of becoming or developing oneself, and studied the inevitable and steady deterioration of a society in the changing system that underscores the contemporary material culture. Consequently, he focused on change based on progress. Buckmister Fuller’s World Game created in the 1960s emulated the war-gaming techniques of the NORAD or North American Air Defence command, deploying these strategies for producing information about global interdependencies in the use and distribution of resources. Thus, his geodesic maps of the earth were free fom cultural demarcation, thereby creating new global regions devoid of conflicts, hierarchies, and political differences, and maps that were ready for investigation rather than inscription. Fuller was an explorer rather than an inventor; and was the first to recognize the necessity of entropy or the inevitable decline of a system or society. It is evident that Buckminster Fuller was less interested in finding solutions to particular problems than in finding ways to change the use of materials and energetic processes. The geodesic dome is not based on the theory that sticks can be used to make a sphere, but that it is possible to organize dynamic processes such as the transfer of energies through rigid structures, to achieve temporary equilibrium. Fuller’s worldview has a sense of history and humility that geoengineers lack. This kind of invention appears more due to panic than necessity. The complexity of planetary-scale thermodynamics is immense; “they have all the mathematical characteristics of systems that emphatically do not behave in a predictable, linear fashion” (Pratt 2008: 296). Fig. 4 “Spaceship Earth” The Geodesic Dome at Disney World by Fuller (Craven 2011) Fig.5 Geodesic Dome in U.S. Pavilion at Expo ‘67 (Jacobs 2003) Fig.6 Detail of the Geodesic Dome (MOMA 2010) Buckminster Fuller conceived the geodesic dome (Figs. 4, 5 & 6) composed of elastic cord and metal, to house humanity. The dome is constructed of a complex framework of self-bracing triangles, making the structure the most economical ever designed. “No other form of enclosure covers so much area without internal supports” (Craven 2011). Moreover, the larger it is, the stronger it becomes. These structures have withstood hurricanes that have flattened traditional homes, and they are extremely easy to assemble, so that an entire house can be built in a single day. The “Spaceship Earth” at the huge AT & T Pavilion at Epcot in Disney World is one of the world’s most famous geodesic domes. The globe is 165 feet in diameter, and encloses 2,200,000 cubic feet of space. “The outer surface is composed of 954 triangular panels made of a polyethylene core sandwiched between two anodized aluminium plates” (Craven 2011). These panels may differ in size and shape. Because of their dome shape, they have not been popular for private homes; however geodesic domes continue to be widely used for weather stations and airport radar shelters today. Fig.7 The Octet Truss by Buckminster Fuller (MOMA 2010) Fig.8 Airplane Hangar Project Using the Octet Truss by Fuller (MOMA 2010) The above design for an airplane hangar uses Fuller’s octet truss to form the lightweight, long-span frame structure. The octet truss is a compound of a tetrahedron and an octahedron, and it was patented in 1961. Buckminster Fuller looked for inexpensive, high performance materials and low cost building procedures. Most of his research pertained to geodesic structures, in which the tetrahedron is the basic unit. These three way grids are composed of members which are mutually supportive or synergetic (Figs.7 & 8). The overall structure being efficient, it permits more slender individual members and reduced construction costs. “Fuller’s research into lightweight, energy-efficient space frame structures was an important reference for avant-garde architects of the 1960s in their experiments with megastructures” (MOMA 2010). Fuller combined the mathematics of topology with an understanding of structure as dynamic energetic process, and almost accidentally envisioned a method of enclosing the world. The works of both nature and man have a transient quality caused by subtle intervention in the constant flow of transforming energies. Buckminster Fuller’s optimism was based on the belief that a definite outcome of human development would be progress toward seeing the world as it really exists both in time and space; and progress towards learning to take appropriate action (Pratt 2008). Planning Future Cities: Sustainability Engine from Fuller’s Trimtab For saving the planet effectively, it is essential to conceive of the smallest project that will powerfully cause a paradigm transformation towards a sustainable society, while being small enough to be feasible (Levine et al 2011). Buckminster Fuller’s “Trimtab” principle can be used to develop a sustainable city-region. The ecological footprint theory behind the Sustainable-City-as-a-Hill concept entitles each individual to a fair share of the earth’s bounty on a regenerative basis. The potential City-as-a-Hill is inspired from medieval Italian hill towns, providing for a walkable pedestrian scale which eliminates the use of vehicles, and generates public spaces such as markets and squares. Not built on a hill, the new urban model would be a city built as a hill. The inner part of the hill would contain all the buildings, transportation and other infrastructure “which usually create dead zones and sprawl in the urban fabric” (Levine et al, 2011). Based on Fuller’s work, the Coupled Pan Space Frame is a post-tensioned concrete structure, or space frame spanning large distances, while allowing for systems infrastructure to be interwoven within the depth of the structure. This frame also facilitates “future expansion and modification within the city, while allowing the surface to evolve in complexity (Levine et al, 2011). OSCAR NIEMEYER’S MODERNIST ARCHITECTURE BASED ON THE THEME OF PROGRESS Brazilian modernist architects such as Oscar Niemeyer and Lucio Costal promoted futuristic trends in building construction to underscore their country’s progress. During the 1930s, the emphasis on low cost housing and advocacy for a national housing policy became the foundation of the modernist movement (Lejeune 2005). Despite rapid urban growth in the 1950s, the majority of Brazilians continued to live in the impoverished countryside. Most of them being illiterate, they were not permitted direct participation in the political process. With increasing numbers of poor people arriving in cities during the intense period of industrialization, it became vital to develop low cost housing to accommodate them. Gravitating to the city, they joined the shadow economy as domestic servants or street sellers, living in self-built shacks in the rapidly expanding, overcrowded inner city with rented tenements which could by 1957 accommodate only a quarter of the inhabitants (Philippou 2006). Social disequilibrium in Brazil was evident by the contrastingly fashionable multi-storeyed buildings and skyscrapers in which the city’s privileged and fast expanding middle class lived. As with historists that the modernists supplanted, the latter also cared for the national heritage and preservation of the past. Thus, in contrast to the principles of international modernism, a factual link was established between the past and the future. The focus was on the structural similarity between the vernacular architecture made of wood, stone and lime, of the 1700s, and the new modern buildings. The modernists argued that their interpretation of history as well as art were the most suitable for architectural planning in Brazil. From the 1940s to the 1960s, they were supported by the frontline Brazilian politician Juscelino Kubitschek who was keen to bring about political and architectural renovation. Hence, the underlying theme of progress is evident in the goal of “constructing a new aesthetic that would symbolize the Brazilian technical autonomy; its management would mark an exemplary path for the future development of the country” (Lejeune 2005: 169). Oscar Niemeyer’s first building for the birthplace of Brazilian Modernism, Sao Paolo the largest city in Brazil, was designed in 1951. The imposing forty-storey Copan Apartment Building (Figs.9 & 10) 140 metres tall, has an estimated 5000 residents in 1,160 apartments, employing over one hundred people. The Copan building “remains the largest structure ever built in Brazil, and the largest residential building in the world” (Philippou 2006: 6), and is a significant landmark of the city, having its own postal code. On the ground floor of the building there are seventy businesses and establishments including a church, a travel agency, a bookstore and a restaurant (MIMOA 2011). Fig.9 Entrance of Copan Apartment Building by Oscar Niemeyer (1957-1956) (Philippou 2006: 6) Fig.10 Full View of Copan Apartment Building by Oscar Niemeyer (MIMOA 2011) The flowing curves of Niemeyer’s high density residential building with facilities on the ground floor, was a new concept in urban housing schemes. This building in the centre of the technocratic city was meant to prevent urban flight to the suburban areas (Philipppou 2006) far from workplaces in the city centre, and were unsustainable due to impacting the environment. This was caused by the necessity for using vehicles for commuting from the suburban areas, which added to the pollution in cities. Oscar Niemeyer also designed luxury apartment buildings for the affluent, to mark the progress and prosperity that he wanted his country to achieve. An example is the Niemeyer Building (Fig.11) constructed between 1954 and 1960 in the city of Belo Horizonte. This twelve-storey high residential tower is on a triangular lot at the junction of three main roads, and dominates the urban space. It has an entirely free form depicting dynamism, elasticity and malleability, which rejects the formal constraints of orthodox Modernism, in favor of “an eroticized curvaceous world of luxury and sensual pleasure” (Philippou 2006: 10). Fig.11 The Niemeyer Building (1954-1960) (Philippou 2006: 10) Niemeyer took advantage of reinforced concrete’s weight and flexibility to use dynamism and rhythm through concave and convex curves. These are emphasized by the addition of thirty-six floor of thin horizontal sunscreens which follow the contours of the floor slabs. For the viewer from the open square or a moving car, the lines of the building appear to be in motion. To enhance the exterior of the apartment block, the architect has “covered the solid walls with ornamental ceramic tiles on a bold black-and-white leopard-skin-like pattern, which makes the curved surfaces appear to vibrate in the shifting sunlight” (Philippou 2006: 11). The revolutionary project Brasilia was conceived by Niemeyer as well as the capital city’s political backers as a manifestation of “progress and economic expansion, as well as the symbol of a culturally vibrant and confident nation” (Hernandez 2010: 11). In the construction of the capital city of Brazil, the new concept which was both national and universal, emerged from the synthesis of new technologies and unrestricted creative imagination. In designing and building Brasilia, Oscar Niemeyer could establish on a large scale his style of creating “structures so light that they seemed at times to float above the ground” (Lejeune 2005: 169). Moreover, the architect could achieve the modernist ideal of making no distinctions between architecture and urbanism, landscaping and plastic arts. Thus, Brasilia showed a perfect harmonization between architecture by Oscar Niemeyer, urban design by Lucio Costal, and landscape design by Roberto Burle Marx and various artists’ public sculptures. Fig.12 Brazilian National Congress (1957-1964) by Oscar Niemeyer (architecture.about.com 2011) Oscar Niemeyer designed the National Congress (Fig.12) during the late 1950s and early 1960s, while working as chief architect for Brasilia. The building complex is composed of numerous structures. In Fig. is seen the domed Senate building on the left, the Parliament office tower at the centre, and the bowl-shaped Chamber of the Deputies on the right (architecture.about.com 2011). Rattenbury, Bevan and Long (2006: 2010) add that the “great saucer domes of the National Congress fully exploit concrete’s plastic and sculptural properties”. The transforming power of modernist architecture combined new ideas of free space, free structure, independent facades, and the incorporation of distinctive architectural elements to keep the heat and excessive light of a tropical country from the inner rooms of buildings. Some characteristic elements of Niemeyer’s modernist buildings included the solar protection provided with fixed architectonic pieces, ”freedom of the ramp, the flexibility of volumes, the use of curves as expressive elements, and a lack of distinction between internal and external spaces” (Lejeune 2005: 168). Conclusion This paper has highlighted the work of modernist architects Buckminster Fuller and Oscar Niemeyer. The theme of Progress in both architects’ projects have been studied. A detailed study of some of the buildings designed and constructed by the two architects has revealed their differing concepts of progress as manifested in building construction. The evidence indicates that Buckminster Fuller’s conceptualizations have been radically different, aimed at providing low cost, mass produced homes that can be moved to other places by means of airlifting by helicopter. His philosophical mind believed that living in mobile homes was key to building inter-community and international ties among people from different regions. Buckminster Fuller had novel ideas regarding the development of the light-weight mobile homes, and the geodesic dome for covering immense expanses of area without internal support, which could also be used for future cities in the form of hills, with all the infrastructure built inside the dome, and the houses built on the sloping outer surface of the dome. Although the mobile home was not feasible due to various reasons pertaining to its livability and other factors, his invention of the geodesic dome has been well acclaimed. It continues to be used as in the U.S. pavilion at Expo ’67. Similarly, the octet truss has proved to be efficient, and continues to be used in contemporary architecture. On the other hand, Oscar Niemeyer designed buildings that were for the prosperous middle and higher classes of Brazilian society. Like Fuller, he also believed that a country’s progress was evident throught its buildings and architectural constructions. Niemeyer preferred to create historic landmarks and royal palaces, as well as public buildings and residential apartments. His unique style included the use of pavilions, inter-mingling of the inside of the structure with the outside, and curved and wavy lines in the building’s exterior. These features emphasized the appearance of lightness of the entire building. Modernist focus on progress formed the vital core of Niemeyer’s architecture. He realized his vision for a new capital city Brasilia entirely constructed on progressively modernist lines. It is concluded that both architects strove to create buildings denoting progress of humanity. However, their perspectives and styles were different, with Fuller envisioning large-scale projects that aimed to encompass the globe, and with Niemeyer content to build multiple-storeyed mega structures of high density housing and public buildings. Bibliography Architecture.about.com (2011). Brazilian National Congress: Oscar Niemeyer. Retrieved on 28th April, 2011 from: http://architecture.about.com/od/findphotos/ig/Oscar-Niemeyer/Brazilian-National-Congress.htm Associated Content. (2011). House of the future: Dymaxion dwelling machine. Retrieved on 28th April, 2011 from: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/380028/house_of_the_future_dymaxion_dwelling.html BFI (Buckminster Fuller Institute). (2007). The Design Science Lab: Asheville, North Carolina. Buckminster Fuller Institute and BigPictureSmallWorld. Retrieved on 28th April, 2011 from: http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_50/703000/703247/4/print/DSLReport2006revision5.pdf Buckminster Fuller Institute. (2010). Dymaxion House: The Dymaxion dwelling machine. Buckminster Fuller Institute. Retrieved on 28th April from: http://www.bfi.org/about-bucky/buckys-big-ideas/dymaxion-world/dymaxion-house Craven, J. (2011). Spaceship Earth: Buckminster Fuller’s geodesic domes. About.com Architecture. Retrieved on 28th April, 2011 from: http://architecture.about.com/od/geodesicdomes/a/spaceship.htm Diani, M. & Ingraham, C. (1989). Restructuring architectural theory. The United States of America: Northwestern University Press. Gabel, M. & Walker, J. (Sept.- Oct. 2006). The anticipatory leader: Buckminster Fuller’s principles for making the world work. The Futurist: pp.39-44. Retrieved on 28th April, 2011 from: http://designsciencelab.com/resources/Fuller%20Leadership.pdf Gorman, M.J. (2005). Buckminster Fuller: Designing for mobility. New York: Skira Publishers. Hernandez, F. (2010). Beyond modernist masters: Contemporary architecture in Latin America. New York: Springer. Hvattum, M. & Hermansen, C. (2004). Tracing modernity: Manifestations of modern in architecture and the city. New York: Routledge. Jacobs, D.W. (2003). Geodesic dome in U.S. Pavilion at Expo ’67. Bucky Fuller History and Mystery. Retrieved on 28th April, 2011 from: http://www.architectureweek.com/2003/0813/news_1-1.html Lejeune, J-F. (2005). Cruelty and Utopia: Cities and landscapes of Latin America. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Levine, R.S., Chaisuparasmikul, P., Yanarella, E.J., Larsen, J., Hughes, M.T. & Mather, C.R. (2011). The Buckminster Fuller challenge: The sustainability engine. A program of the Buckminster Fuller Institute. Retrieved on 28th April, 2011 from: http://challenge.bfi.org/application_summary/123# MIMOA (Mi Modern Architecture). (2011). Copan building: Oscar Niemeyer. Retrieved on 28th April, 2011 from: http://www.mimoa.eu/projects/Brazil/S%E3o%20Paulo/Copan%20Building MOMA (The Museum of Modern Art). (2010). Dymaxion Dwelling Machine, Wichita, Kansas. R. Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983). Retrieved on 28th April, 2011 from: http://www.moma.org/collection/browse_results.php?criteria=O:AD:E:2030|A:AR:E:1&page_number=8&template_id=1&sort_order=1 Philippou, S. (2006). Challenging the hierarchies of the city: Oscar Niemeyer’s mid- twentieth-century residential buildings. Retrieved on 28th April, 2011 from: http://academics.ewi.tudelft.nl/live/binaries/2e2a5b07-3f77-4d71-b1d1-33a897e794aa/doc/Conference%20paper%20Philippou.pdf Pratt, K. (2008). Kevin Pratt on geoengineering. Artforum International, 47 (3): pp.294- 296. Rattenbury, K., Bevan, R. & Long, K. (2006). Architects Today, Volume 2004. London: Laurence King Publishing. Ritchie, I. (2006). Mobile Utopia. The Architectural Review, 219 (1308): p.78. Rocco, R. (2007). The image of the city Sao Paolo: Identity and crisis. Urbani Izziv, 14 (2/ 03): pp.108-111. Read More