Bruno Taut and Glass Perceptions - Essay Example

Bruno Taut and Glass Perceptions Introduction Architecture based on glass goes back long in time, when glass architecture was just in experimental stages. Today, however, what we see is the glass architecture completely developed and evolved in lieu of developing technology and time. However, it is only to the pioneers of the glass architecture that we owe the present wonders made in glass. Amongst those pioneers come a few famous names like Loudon, Paxton, Scheerbart and Taut. In this paper, we will be discussing the attitude of the famous architect, Bruno Taut, towards the use of glass in architecture. The basic point under discussion will be if he preferred glass to be transparent, even as comparing his attitude and creation “Glashaus” with the attitude towards glass of Joseph Paxton, the famous creator of “the Crystal Palace”. It may be noticed here that Paxton and Taut, both were premieres in starting a new culture in the field of glass and iron architectures. Both believed in a certain purpose of glass towards the building or the piece of architecture they built. However, the difference in their ideologies lies in their motive behind the development of glass architecture. While Paxton was a gardener primarily, his motive behind developing and constructing glass houses or buildings were to find an ideal place for the development of the plants. Taut was an architect in the real sense and his outlook towards building glass structures was completely architectural in sense. Keeping this difference in mind, we will begin on in comparing the famous works of both the architects. However, before we proceed, it is important to understand the beginning of glass architecture. History of Use of Glass in Architecture It may be noticed that the pioneer in the field of glass work architecture happens to be a famous gardener of his time, John Claudius Loudon. During the time when architecture and gardening were two different mediums for expression, Loudon was the first to coin the term ‘Gardenesque’, pertaining to the amalgamation of art and gardening (Ersoy, 2009). With that the concept of and term ‘landscaping’ came into origin. According to Loudon, any work of art should be such that cannot be mistaken as the work of nature, thus creating the concept of artificial gardens. After spending years on trying to find the right environment for growing plants against the nature, Loudon came up with the concept of glass house. Glass house would help him maintain an artificial environment inside, suited best for the requirements of plants. While his concept was in the roots, another scientist proved that plants from altogether different environment could be transported to a different environment through a glass box. This firmly established what Loudon was trying to do and hence, artificial gardens, growing all sorts of plants and trees, enclosed in a glass house maintaining a suitable environment came into being. He maintained exact calculations and balance to foster best growth possibilities in plants. What is more, the identification of glass houses and its properties led to several gardeners of Loudon’s time to experiment with the nutrition and needs of plants for the best performance. During this time, Paxton was training to be a farmer and was highly motivated by the works of Loudon. Looking back towards the works by Paxton, the impact of Loudon’s work and ideologies is completely evident. Comparing Paxton’s and Taut’s Ideas about Glass As has been explained above, despite the fact that both Paxton and Taut have developed structures of glass and iron, their perception of the same had completely different meanings and backgrounds. Their works and beliefs with regards to the glass have been explained in detail further on. Paxton’s Ideologies Paxton was a gardener and highly motivated by the ideologies of Loudon. Believing in finding a solution to the naturally hostile environment towards the growth of certain species of plants, Paxton decided to use glass for building favorable, unnatural and ‘real’ environs for these species. Several scholars have mistaken the term ‘real’ for structural truth in the glass buildings by Paxton. The truth, however, is that the term ‘real’ here corresponds to the real environment of the species of plants. To explain further, the aim of the glasshouse was to create the natural habitable state of environment unnaturally. Therefore, even though the state within the glasshouse was unnatural, it was completely real or natural for the species of plants inhabiting it. The main aim of the Glasshouse was to make the plants believe by undertaking artificial means that they are living in their real or true environments. As Dickens put the phenomenon into words, “He coaxed the flower into bloom by manufacturing a Berbician climate in a tiny South America, under a glass case.” Now according to Paxton, the only substance or material that could help in maintaining the natural environs without being effected by the natural forces was glass. Paxton employed the use of glass by laminating the wood and steel that was used in the making of building. He explained the lamination as corresponding to the way a table cloth covers the table, saving the table from getting spoilt. Paxton was of the view that a glasshouse corresponded to creating a real virtual world. By maintaining unnatural and artificial environments inside the glass house, he was creating a virtual reality that, however, was true. Anyone visiting the glass house will be transferred into this real virtual world. The Glass house would abstain the visitor from feeling any of the influences from outside and hence create a different reality altogether. It may now be said that Paxton’s interest in glass buildings was merely on the level of a gardener. For him, transparency of the glass was all important for letting the light in for the growth of the plants. During his time, transparent glass was all there was, while a few did experiment with tinted glasses as well. Taut’s Perception of Glass Taut was an architect by profession practicing during the WW I. Taut believed in the notion of using colors to express his beliefs and mysticism. He was amongst the very few, who at the time when only shades of beige, white, off white and browns were working, took a step ahead to paint other brighter shades. He was given a few housing projects, for which, he made use of extremely bright colors to the extent that the residents of the housing complex took offense to the color scheme that was too “distracting for the mind”. Since the beginning, Taut was a firm believer of expressing feelings through colors. His work with colors led to the term expressionism, where Taut made for the pioneer (Janson & Janson, 2003). His work was termed as the work of activism (Richards & Gilbert, 2006). During his time, he found it difficult to find assignments for the very reason that he would use dark shades (even when they were mutest according to him). Nevertheless, his interest in gothic style buildings led him to the fateful meeting with another big architect of his time, Paul Scheerbart. Scheerbart was of the belief that for a dawn of new, more civilized society, the introduction of glass as walls is very important. However, he believed that transparent glass would not be as effective as colored glass, by introducing ‘sparks’ (Ollson, 2004). Until meeting with Scheerbart, Taut would experiment with colors on concrete walls. However, his meeting with Scheerbart changed it all. He became suddenly extremely inclined in using his colors with glass into forming colored glass structures. Since their first meeting in 1913, Taut and Scheerbart became inseparable and within a year of their meeting, came up with GlasHaus (Glass house). The duo experimented with the mosaics, tinted glass and coloured glass. This became the first milestone in the history of colored glass. Never before did colored glass make such news as it did by the construction of Glashaus. Taut, apart from using stained or colored glass in the building also made use of glass bricks and crystals that introduced the concept of the surreal quality of the glass. The stairs he made in his Glashaus were made of these bricks that gave the stairs a surreal, unearthly translucent glow and look. Further on, his use of glass crystals to refract and reflect light also helped him establish the “highest symbols of purity and death”. Comparisons It may now be noticed that for both, Paxton and Taut, glass solved certain purpose. While for Paxton, transparency in glass structure was needed in the wake of solving the purpose for plants, Taut made extreme use of colors to bring in life into the glass structure. Taut’s inclination towards colored or stained glass is hence extremely comprehensible. For Paxton, however, transparency was a necessity. Was Glass Transparent to Taut? As has already been established by the discussion above, Taut was never a follower of dull or muted tones. For him, it was all about expressing himself and asserting his emotions in the environment with the help of colors. His Glashaus has Scheerbart’s verse citing, “Colored Glass Destroys Hatred.” Olson (2004) says, Schherbart and Taut’s Glass House “consists of colored glass elements. The daylight passes and filters the colours, and originates a translucent —but not distinctly transparent— impression. From the inside you can discern the outside. From the outside you can get an inkling of forms taking shape.” It is worth mentioning here that both Taut and Scheerbart were great admirers of Gothic work and buildings. Their Glass House and the work of glass (colored, stained and mosaics) conform to their fascination with the Gothic structures, cathedrals and art, while using the modern colors and techniques. The interior space of the Glass House has some amazing colors and light. The purpose of Taut’s Glass House is to reflect beauty and soothe the minds of people suffering from the mar’ of the outside world. Taut has used mosaic, basin water, colored glass, reflex and light beautifully to fill the entire building with the dancing colors and reflections. Taut initiated the era where Glass was started being looked upon as a potential architectural material. People started favoring glass architecture for hygiene purposes as well – full of natural light and sunshine. It may hence be successfully stated that Taut was not inclined towards the usage of transparent glass, though he did evolve transparent glass into translucency and crystals. For Taut, glass was one with special properties – floating, angular, splendor, sparkling and light. Taut initiated a beginning of a new era where architecture was full of emotions and feelings – colors – a dawn of new epoch. References Janson, H.W. and Janson, A.F (2003). History of art: the Western tradition (Edition 6).: Prentice Hall. Olsson, G. (2004). Paul Scheerbart's utopia of coloured glass . AIC 2004 Color and Paints, , 194-196. Kisby, S. Bruno Taut: Architecture And Colour . Welsh School of Architecture , , Extracted from: http://www.kisbee.co.uk/sarc/taut/taut.htm Richards, B. and Gilbert, D. (2006). New glass architecture .: Yale University Press. Read More