Between Beauty and Functionality - Essay Example

Wittgenstein and Le Corbusier: Between Beauty and Functionality The principles of architecture are controversial and disputable as some of them change with time or vanish due to obsolescence or redundancy. Nevertheless, there are certain values on which the whole concept of architecture is based. One of the first world architects, Vitruvius, formulated his famous triad of architecture, which remains actual and relevant until today. Vitruvius Pollio emphasizes the three principles of architectural theory being solid, useful, and beautiful. The Vitruvian theory is still evident in the contemporary architecture, as well as, it is implemented in education. The firmness, utility, and beauty Vitruvian triad has been discussed and still is as it is considered to be one of the first architectural theories. The unity of firmness, functionality, and beauty was further explored by such philosophers and architects as Wittgenstein and Le Corbusier. Both theorists reflected their own vision of the combination of these three components. The unity of beauty and functionality is the subject of examination of this paper. One of the most important places among artists of the Roman époque belongs to the Ancient architect Marcus Vitruvius Polio who wrote his well-known mulity-voulume treatise dedicated to architecture entitled "De architectura". Vitruvius`s life dates are unknown, but some indirect researches are prone to associate his life with Augustuss era, the second half of the first century BC. Despite the large volume of Vitruvius`s books they are simple to read and comprehend. At the beginning of each book the author gives a short summary, adding different interesting messages from the history of philosophy, literature, and art. Also, a simple review of the contents of the Vitruvius`s treatise reveals very much in view of simplicity and those architectural methods which he represents on the basis of a certain aesthetic position. "De architecture" can be regarded as the encyclopedia of technical science. Architecture, from Vitruvius understanding, includes three main aspects: architecture in a narrow sense of this word, i.e. equipment construction, production of devices for time measurement, and mechanics, i.e. production of weight lifting and water hoist engines. According to the definition of the Vitruvius, practice is based on the theory, while experience is checked and directed by science (Vitruvius 4). Following the requirements of encyclopedic education for the architect, Vitruvius not only lists those sciences which the architect has to know, but also demonstrates connection of the areas of construction with corresponding scientific theories. For instance, the author articulates the link of architecture to musical theory, the application of astronomy in solar and a water-clock construction, the connection between medicine knowledge and architecture in choice of soils for construction (Vitruvius 6). Among the principles of architecture, Vitruvius distinguishes the following components: arrangement, order, eurhythmy, symmetry, propriety, and economy (13). Vitruvius first in his books emphasizes absolute necessity of combination of three factors in any building construction: firmitas (firmness, solidity, materiality), utilitas (functionality, commodity, utility), and venustas (beauty, delight, desire) (17). According to Vitruvius, all these concepts are equally valuable, and excluding one of them leads to the total failure in the architecture. Firmness provides a building with security and integrity, therefore the choice of the location of the future building as well as the choice of the material is crucial. It is possible to achieve firmness with solid fundament and wise choice of materials. Vitruvius insists on natural objects imitation for firmness provision in architecture. For example, in columns construction he suggests to imitate trees structures, which are firm, broad and massive near the roots, and light at the top (24). Functionality can be regarded as a value or as function of architecture. Functionality is concentrated on the architectural space and its usage in accordance with aesthetical principles. Vitruvius explains the concept of functionality as arranging the spaces without faults and obstacles. Moreover, functionality presupposes each room, class of the construction to perform its certain function by corresponding to the needs of the users and occupants. In the first set of books, Vitruvius concentrates on architectural aesthetics, decoration, and proportions in particular. Explaining his opinion of the beauty element, Vitruvius clarifies this term in rather abstract categories from the beginning. Furthermore, he develops his concept of beauty in architecture in direct connection with nature, as he sees that there exists certain truth in it (18). Vitruvius regards natural beauty as eternal and perfect, based on ideal laws of proportion. Moreover, he sees the human body as an example of ideal beauty and symmetry as it can be inserted into a circle as well as into a square precisely. The human body has such a structure that a part of the body is proportional to the whole organism, and the ancient who created the basis for architecture suggested that for a building it is also important to keep parts of the structure proportional to the whole (Vitruvius 34). This signifies the idea of part-to-whole relationship in architecture. As a result, Vitruvius suggests that using already existing perfect forms and proportions of the human body is essential for architecture. Apart from the human body proportions, Vitruvius underlines the necessity of physiological optics laws application in architecture (V, 1-3). Moreover, two characteristic to antiquity notions of natural philosophy underlie Vitruvius theories: the doctrine about four natural elements, and the idea of universal objective value of numerical regularities and the proportional relations, which can be found in the universe (nature) and in the human body form. Without these theories it is almost impossible to construct neither a beautiful building, nor a precisely working car. Therefore, Vitruvius is considered the first theoretical architect who articulated the following essential principles of architecture such as aesthetics, utility, and firmness. He underlined their mutual interdependence and inseparability. As time progressed, these concepts were studied and supplemented by numerous other architects and philosophers. In modernism, the philosophical concepts of beauty and functionality achieved additional impact due to discoveries of new building materials and technologies. One of the most outstanding tangible examples of beauty and functionality embodiment in architecture belongs to Ludwig Wittgenstein, who designed and built a house for his sister. The capturing fact is that Wittgenstein was an outstanding Austrian-British philosopher, and only then an architect. The connection between these two disciplines is indisputable, as they both tend to find the answers on the eternal question of existence although one could argue that both fields attempt to raise a better question rather than solving an ordinary one. Nevertheless, Wittgenstein’s views on the principles of architecture became clear in the design of the building in which he somehow revealed and even retransformed his philosophical views. It is possible to suggest that his view of functionality was reflected through his arrangement of spaces as he was particularly interested in this concept. His engagement into problems of vision and space coincided with his investigation of language, one of the major topics of his philosophical search. He considered space a limited notion as well as language with its boundaries and restrictions (Last 43). Moreover, Wittgenstein used to break space and create visual-space collapses, for example, by opposite reflections or multi functioning doors and joints. According to Last (43), moving through space eradicates space integrity, which was associated with an everyday language by Wittgenstein. Last further explains the remark in such a way “the movement through space and the disposition of use that fostered the reconsideration of limits and boundaries reveal how spatial concepts could not be discarded to leave philosophical concepts intact” (44). The central hall of the Stonborough house, for instance, was designed in such a way that reflections created by similar elements of the doors gaining special significance while moving, involving the walking occupant into a game with space and vision. Transparency, which is another peculiarity of Wittgenstein’s architecture, can be regarded as an attempt to play with space, to overcome the limitations of vision. In the exterior Wittgenstein used transparent glass for the doors, while for some of the interior doors special clear glass in combination with translucent glass was applied. This allowed differentiating the levels of intimacy and involvement, sharing common space with personal environment (Last 41). Wittgenstein also puts an effort in creating an exclusive system of internal light; he designed the radiators himself and insisted on the usage of simple bulbs. The walls, the floor were left without any decoration or covering, and even were not painted (Jeffries 1). The functionality of the house is simplistic and unique as it responds precisely and perfectly to the dweller’s needs. Most interior doors in the house, the glass and steel doors, are bi-paneled, bouble doors that always open out into the rooms in both directions. The point is made on the ability to enter and leave freely as there two terraces and doors can be opened into both sides. This clarity, transparence, and simplicity create total atmosphere of the spacious and simple house. Nevertheless, in any philosophical theories and concepts various hindrances, boundaries, obstacles appear. According to Last (42), the architecture challenged Wittgenstein’s ability to view space from different perspectives which effected his books of philosophical works later, Tractatus Logico Philosophicus and Philosophical Investigations in particular. The beauty component in Wittgenstein`s architecture is reflected in a rather complex and controversial way. The exterior look of the building can be described as austere and intentionally simple. Wittgenstein developed obvious asymmetry in his construction that is why the house is often associated with white cubes placed in misbalanced way. The exterior does not have any element of decoration or ornaments, which was probably an act of resistance to the Art Noveau and Bauhaus styles surviving their last days in Vienna at that time (Jeffries 1). The choice of the color of the building creates an impression of sophistication and tenderness; however, the forms suggest implied deepness and suppressing feelings, they intentionally devoid of curves. There are numerous regular vertical windows divided into three halves which create certain symmetry within whole asymmetry This game with symmetry is peculiar feature of Wittgenstein’s exterior look. The exterior doors are all glass-and steel with double divisions, while the doors leading on the terraces are both made totally of glass (Last 41). Wittgenstein tried to emphasize the atmosphere of transparence and connection to the nature, preserving his intended simplicity and even asceticism. He used simple forms and materials to underlie this dependence of inner space and outer surrounding. The main point was placed on the symmetry component creation. Thus, logical space arrangement, creation of special color atmosphere, playing with symmetrical and asymmetrical components, and the absence of an immediate decoration allowed Wittgenstein to create an exclusive example of modernist architecture and reflect his philosophical concepts and theories which leads to discuss one of the most famous architects in the modernism era Le Corbusier. Le Corbusier was one of dominant architects of modernism era who achieved his fame due to his innovative and original constructions and his valuable writings. He dedicated himself to the exploration of the topic of modern buildings planning and design. Le Corbusier tried to embody his vision of architecture, as a means of emotional relations establishment, in his works. Le Corbusier managed to develop his own vision of beauty in architecture, which was often challengeable to the viewers at first. Nevertheless, living in the era of technology, he understood the necessity of comfort, convenience and logic in architecture, thus developing principles of modern, practical constructions. Le Corbusier in his book Towards a New Architecture described his technical and aesthetic theories of architecture, explored the peculiarities of different styles and époques and formulated certain innovative aspects of modern architecture improvement. For the architect the concept of beauty was inseparable from the functionality. According to Le Corbusier (17), the beautiful in architecture can be revealed when certain masses are put into light creating tangible real geometrical forms for our vision. All these cubes, cones, spheres, pyramids are essential to human understanding of aesthetics as they are natural primary forms that are perceived without deviations. Moreover, one of the most important goals of architecture is to “vitalize the surface” adjusting it to the requirements of the dwellers and allowing it to serve the masses (Le Corbusier 34). Functional and subsequently aesthetic surface usage became distinctive feature of Le Corbusier’s architecture. He suggested that in construction it is possible to separate bearing elements from not bearing. Instead of the former bases upon which construction was based without control calculation, separate concrete columns take the place of former walls, releasing much space and giving the construction lighter look. Rooms are thus relieved of dampness, they receive enough light and air, and the construction site turns into a garden which passes under the house (Curtis 57). Among other functional innovations of Corbusier it is important to recall his idea of windows transformation. Le Corbusier proposed to merge the windows into one single horizontal window, ribbon windows. Such window provides better lighting and form a specific geometric pattern of the façade. One of the other ways to create beauty in the construction is to use regulating lines, which were the means of harmony creation since ancient architecture. These lines have the purpose of “fixing the geometry” of the construction (Le Corbusier 89). Regulating lines maintain the construction excluding its instability, and create special rhythm of the building. Beautiful was also associated with passionate, emotional in understanding of the author. Thus, architecture performs its direct function only in the case when it creates emotional feedback and inspiration with the help of masses, surface, light, forms (Le Corbusier 91). Hence for the interior it is important to take into account all the elements: windows, doors, walls, which can add to the emotional state of happiness or sadness just with the right usage of illumination (Curtis 95). In such way it is possible to claim that Le Corbusier shares Vitruvius’s views of the optical laws of harmony. The other point where these two architects agree is the concept of proportions. Le Corbusier claims that people naturally feel and understand harmony in everything due to the inborn sense of proportions. That is why clear embodiment as well as pure intention, inspirational impact are essential for the art to be perceived as beautiful (117). However, for architecture there exist certain utilitarian limitations, because it has to provide some functional necessities. Every architect has the ability to decide whether to deal with functionality and beauty as a unite element or to separate them. This choice becomes evident in the contours and profile of the construction (Le Corbusier 214). Thus the aim of the architect is to create a composition of poetics, emotions and utilitarian functions and incarnate it in the constructions. Le Courbusier as well as Wittgenstein have managed to create philosophical works rather than buildings as they both underpinned their architecture by deep inner meditations. They both realized that aesthetics could not be sacrificed to functionality; nevertheless, without functionality the construction is senseless. Simple tangible forms, visible game of symmetry and asymmetry, attention to details and materials constitute common features in the architecture of Le Corbusier and Wittgenstein. Both architects remained apologists of natural forms and internal human sense of harmony. The connection between philosophy and architecture is as old as the disciplines themselves. The first known world architect, Vitruvius, understood this link and first decided to explore architecture from philosophical perspective. In such a way he formulated his famous three principles that constitute the quintessence of the construction: beauty, functionality, and firmness. These three components have remained actual and important till today despite the spread of mass production, new materials invention, and globalization. The combination of beauty and functionality gained special impact in the 20th century with the innovative works in both architecture and philosophy. Le Corbusier created special Modernism vision of emotional architecture, performing its utilitarian functions. Wittgenstein on the other hand, being a philosopher solved the problem of building construction in his own way, demonstrating peculiar understanding of beauty and functionality. Thus, each of these great minds contributed to the development of architecture as a philosophical discipline. Works Cited Jeffrey, Stuart. “A dwelling for the gods”. The Guardian, 5 Jan. 2002. Web < http://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/jan/05/arts.highereducation> Curtis, William. Le Corbusier Ideas and Forms. London: Phaidon Press Art Books, 2003. Last, Nana. Transgressions and Inhabitations: Wittgensteinan Spatial Practices between Architecture and Philosophy. The MIT Press, 1998. Le Corbusier. Towards a New Architecture. New York: Dover Publications, I NC.,1986 Vitruvius, Polio. The Ten Books on Architecture. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1914. Read More