 |
| Eugéne Viollet-le-Duc:1814-79 |
 |
| Gottfried Semper:1803-79 |
2. German architect/art critic/arch. professor Gottfried Semper (on your right)
 |
| John Ruskin:1819-1900 |
Ever heard of them? Yeah, neither have i til' last week in arch329. But apparently, all the sleek modern architecture with its tall steel columns & beams that defined the middle of 20th century, or even our current movement in art & architecture can actually be attributed to these guys who would now ask what kind of devilish device an AutoCad is...
... Yes, a modern building like Mies' Seagram Building or PJ's Glass House can thank these 3 guys for grandfathering them into their architectural significance. They're not all alike nor are they completely different, but these 3 guys were the true hipsters of their time for they lit the initial spark of the idea behind modern architecture and ultimately other movements that followed.
Here's the story...
Here's the story...
During an era where classical Roman/Greek architecture and traditional Gothic styles still ruled the cultural trends of the western arts, École des Beaux-Arts represented this firm establishment of mainstream-Classical Architecture that apparently have been around way too long and way too annoying for these 3 guys. They would declare that Beaux-Arts' pretentious precedents like the classical architecture & its glorified ornamentation includes no context nor meaningful intent. They would go on to rip Beaux-Arts by declaring that their process is just a slavish copying of ponderous monumentality (Curtis p.24). Simply speaking, "Beaux-Arts is lame." But fortunately, new wave of ideas crept around the middle of 19th century...
With the tide of the raging Industrial Revolution within the 19th century, a brand spankin new building material was introduced to the world of Architecture: the iron. In 1851, The Great Exhibition revealed an exhibition hall that showed off what this new shiny black thing can do with its pre-fab'd wrought iron modules and a ton of glass. At the time, where stone and wood were the only familiar construction materials, seeing exposed skinny iron piers supporting a huge amount of indoor space was bizarre.
And even though Crystal Palace wasn't the first structure to feature the iron construction in such fashion (Labrouste's St. Geneviève Library displayed them almost a decade before The Great Exhibition), Viollet still gave kudos to iron building material, because it allowed some snappy modular construction (Pevsner p.34-37). So the Frenchman was a big fan of this new material on Crystal Palace that was "honestly" featured without veneering the cast-iron frame work. The German guy, Semper, would get along just fine with Viollet, as he actually foresaw that style needed to be appropriated to the machine methods after his nice visit to Crystal Palace (Curtis p.100). So as these two guys basically oo'd & awed through The Great Exhibition, fulfilling their architectural nerdom... although rightly so... i would too... and with a common enemy (Beaux-Arts) among the 3 men, they probably could be best friends right? ... but there has to be that one guy... the Mr. Buzzkillington.
Unlike the two inspired men, Johnny Ruskin decided to grumble like an old fogey about this new iron frame building technology innovation, which is really ironic because he's the youngest out of the 3 guys that i'm comparing here. Also he scoffed at Crystal Palace by basically calling it a giant greenhouse... true, but he didn't see the big picture. Also, he called one of the iron framed railway station a "rat-hole", but which he doesn't know that this "rat-hole" iron frame construction will eventually evolve into the revolutionary steel frame construction that opened the flood gates for one of the most recognizable architectural/engineering marvels in human history that allowed structures to be built in previously unimaginable heights, but to be fair he wouldn't care about this because he strictly favored vernacular architecture created by craftsmen because he values ornament over architecture and the the craftsmen/masons/carvers who created the ornament directly applied his effort, discipline, and passion... i digress, but Ruskin did acknowledge that "the time is probably near when a new system of architectural laws will be developed, adapted entirely to metallic construction (Pevesner 34)." As much as he sounded ignorant earlier... he was right, respect must be given for his humble admission over the possibility of his own human err... Even as socially leftist (socialist) as he was, it was also ironic that he was extremely conservative against innovations like mechanization/machining of construction. But it is logical that this is actually deriving from his socially convicted anti-bourgeoisie passion by resenting the rich while favoring the blue-collar laborers like the craftsman, it's the same passion and romanticism rooting from this that made him favor the "natural motif" (Phaidon p.143). This idea and passion drove the Arts & Crafts movement and other artists/architect like Antonio Gaudí. Within these incredible amount/degree of differences among the 3, it's surprising to know that Ruskin would agree with "the material truth." ... deriving from his 7 Lamps of Architecture theory.
So as we know that our friend Ruskin here can be a lil' sappy with his sentimental passion for the art behind the building, Semper searched for inner laws of artistic forms by applying taxonomy to art. He's definitely more cerebral than our Johnny Sappy Ruskin, as he ventured to find an analogous pattern behind the already broad idea for "art." For example, Semper defines style as, "giving emphasis and artistic significance to the basic theme and to all intrinsic and extrinsic coefficients that modify the embodiment of the theme in a work of art." ... ...i had to read that about 5 times to really understand it, but in layman's terms, style is defined as abstracting a theme/idea and the theme/idea's significant subject&state... okay to put it more into layman's terms, style is "abstracting the zeitgeist." (...now why couldn't Gottfried just write those 3 words... the latter is extremely taxing on the brain) But Semper is an empiricist, deriving conclusions through sensory experience and applying historicism. The sensory experience can be backed up by his The historicism behind his empiricist stand can be explained by his thesis about precedents. He wrote, "architecture everywhere borrowed its types form pre-architectural conditions of human settlement." The most rudimentary form of architecture/"pre-architecture", a hut, is used to derive his 4 Elements of Architecture. The Hearth, Substructure/Platform, Roof, and Enclosure. These are figurative terms to describe the most common element that is found in architecture. Semper suggests that the Hearth describes the socially driving force within the architecture. For example, the fire within the hearth attracts a family or a community to drive the civilization into production. Philip Johnson applied this theory into his famous Glass House. Johnson describes the fireplace as the hearth and it's where the family will physically gather around, leading to social interaction, which then leads to progression of the family life... and that is why the fireplace in the Glass House is placed relatively in the center of the home's floor space ("Philip Johnson" Documentary 1997).
So Semper was incredibly philosophical compared to the simple yet emotionally inspiring words of Ruskin, but out of the 3, Viollet still retains his uniqueness from the 2 by manifesting his idea Rationally. Rationalism argues that the best forms were rooted in functional or structural demands (Curtis p.26). This is easily seen by Viollet's firm opinion over materials. It should be reminded that Viollet admired and welcomed the iron because the structural iron frame were not hidden, but rather it was truthfully displaying it self that it was in fact, made out of iron. He believes in direct expression of structure and program (Curtis p.41). Theses ideas directly influenced Art Noveau, but half a century later, a man named Mies Van Der Rohe, who we all know him as "The Father of Modern Architecture," studied the Gothic Churches like Viollet, pursued to find the new definition/style/form/zeitgeist of his time like Viollet, and he used the rational design approach... just like Viollet... In the end, Modernism was born with Viollet's (and traces from Semper and Ruskin) lineage that are hinted behind the Modernist's idea... such as form follows function, expression of structure, truth to materials, and machinization.
... welp, before i go, i have to mention something about restoration vs. preservation idea about the three... i'm gonna simplify my knowledge about them because i'm pretty sure i wrote more than i needed up there... =/
Pro-restoration guys would be Viollet & Semper, and preservation loneman obviously being Ruskin.
Viollet restored Carcassone with plenty of emotional disagreements from Ruskin that Viollet's radical interpretation is basically murdering the architecture... ohhh sappy johnny... and Semper.... well, i'm sure Semper would be okay with restoring because his son restored the Semper Opera after its fire and Semper also added/restored a Gallery Wing to the Zwinger.
With the tide of the raging Industrial Revolution within the 19th century, a brand spankin new building material was introduced to the world of Architecture: the iron. In 1851, The Great Exhibition revealed an exhibition hall that showed off what this new shiny black thing can do with its pre-fab'd wrought iron modules and a ton of glass. At the time, where stone and wood were the only familiar construction materials, seeing exposed skinny iron piers supporting a huge amount of indoor space was bizarre.
And even though Crystal Palace wasn't the first structure to feature the iron construction in such fashion (Labrouste's St. Geneviève Library displayed them almost a decade before The Great Exhibition), Viollet still gave kudos to iron building material, because it allowed some snappy modular construction (Pevsner p.34-37). So the Frenchman was a big fan of this new material on Crystal Palace that was "honestly" featured without veneering the cast-iron frame work. The German guy, Semper, would get along just fine with Viollet, as he actually foresaw that style needed to be appropriated to the machine methods after his nice visit to Crystal Palace (Curtis p.100). So as these two guys basically oo'd & awed through The Great Exhibition, fulfilling their architectural nerdom... although rightly so... i would too... and with a common enemy (Beaux-Arts) among the 3 men, they probably could be best friends right? ... but there has to be that one guy... the Mr. Buzzkillington.
Unlike the two inspired men, Johnny Ruskin decided to grumble like an old fogey about this new iron frame building technology innovation, which is really ironic because he's the youngest out of the 3 guys that i'm comparing here. Also he scoffed at Crystal Palace by basically calling it a giant greenhouse... true, but he didn't see the big picture. Also, he called one of the iron framed railway station a "rat-hole", but which he doesn't know that this "rat-hole" iron frame construction will eventually evolve into the revolutionary steel frame construction that opened the flood gates for one of the most recognizable architectural/engineering marvels in human history that allowed structures to be built in previously unimaginable heights, but to be fair he wouldn't care about this because he strictly favored vernacular architecture created by craftsmen because he values ornament over architecture and the the craftsmen/masons/carvers who created the ornament directly applied his effort, discipline, and passion... i digress, but Ruskin did acknowledge that "the time is probably near when a new system of architectural laws will be developed, adapted entirely to metallic construction (Pevesner 34)." As much as he sounded ignorant earlier... he was right, respect must be given for his humble admission over the possibility of his own human err... Even as socially leftist (socialist) as he was, it was also ironic that he was extremely conservative against innovations like mechanization/machining of construction. But it is logical that this is actually deriving from his socially convicted anti-bourgeoisie passion by resenting the rich while favoring the blue-collar laborers like the craftsman, it's the same passion and romanticism rooting from this that made him favor the "natural motif" (Phaidon p.143). This idea and passion drove the Arts & Crafts movement and other artists/architect like Antonio Gaudí. Within these incredible amount/degree of differences among the 3, it's surprising to know that Ruskin would agree with "the material truth." ... deriving from his 7 Lamps of Architecture theory.
So as we know that our friend Ruskin here can be a lil' sappy with his sentimental passion for the art behind the building, Semper searched for inner laws of artistic forms by applying taxonomy to art. He's definitely more cerebral than our Johnny Sappy Ruskin, as he ventured to find an analogous pattern behind the already broad idea for "art." For example, Semper defines style as, "giving emphasis and artistic significance to the basic theme and to all intrinsic and extrinsic coefficients that modify the embodiment of the theme in a work of art." ... ...i had to read that about 5 times to really understand it, but in layman's terms, style is defined as abstracting a theme/idea and the theme/idea's significant subject&state... okay to put it more into layman's terms, style is "abstracting the zeitgeist." (...now why couldn't Gottfried just write those 3 words... the latter is extremely taxing on the brain) But Semper is an empiricist, deriving conclusions through sensory experience and applying historicism. The sensory experience can be backed up by his The historicism behind his empiricist stand can be explained by his thesis about precedents. He wrote, "architecture everywhere borrowed its types form pre-architectural conditions of human settlement." The most rudimentary form of architecture/"pre-architecture", a hut, is used to derive his 4 Elements of Architecture. The Hearth, Substructure/Platform, Roof, and Enclosure. These are figurative terms to describe the most common element that is found in architecture. Semper suggests that the Hearth describes the socially driving force within the architecture. For example, the fire within the hearth attracts a family or a community to drive the civilization into production. Philip Johnson applied this theory into his famous Glass House. Johnson describes the fireplace as the hearth and it's where the family will physically gather around, leading to social interaction, which then leads to progression of the family life... and that is why the fireplace in the Glass House is placed relatively in the center of the home's floor space ("Philip Johnson" Documentary 1997).
So Semper was incredibly philosophical compared to the simple yet emotionally inspiring words of Ruskin, but out of the 3, Viollet still retains his uniqueness from the 2 by manifesting his idea Rationally. Rationalism argues that the best forms were rooted in functional or structural demands (Curtis p.26). This is easily seen by Viollet's firm opinion over materials. It should be reminded that Viollet admired and welcomed the iron because the structural iron frame were not hidden, but rather it was truthfully displaying it self that it was in fact, made out of iron. He believes in direct expression of structure and program (Curtis p.41). Theses ideas directly influenced Art Noveau, but half a century later, a man named Mies Van Der Rohe, who we all know him as "The Father of Modern Architecture," studied the Gothic Churches like Viollet, pursued to find the new definition/style/form/zeitgeist of his time like Viollet, and he used the rational design approach... just like Viollet... In the end, Modernism was born with Viollet's (and traces from Semper and Ruskin) lineage that are hinted behind the Modernist's idea... such as form follows function, expression of structure, truth to materials, and machinization.
... welp, before i go, i have to mention something about restoration vs. preservation idea about the three... i'm gonna simplify my knowledge about them because i'm pretty sure i wrote more than i needed up there... =/
Pro-restoration guys would be Viollet & Semper, and preservation loneman obviously being Ruskin.
Viollet restored Carcassone with plenty of emotional disagreements from Ruskin that Viollet's radical interpretation is basically murdering the architecture... ohhh sappy johnny... and Semper.... well, i'm sure Semper would be okay with restoring because his son restored the Semper Opera after its fire and Semper also added/restored a Gallery Wing to the Zwinger.
what i have learned: a man with a beard, untrimmed hair, and a Victorian suit must mean that he's a 19th century scholar.
